More Wikipedia fun
Ben Bullock
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
What does "muchan" make of this?
Also, a serious question:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Y%C5%8Don
Any answers?
--
sci.lang.japan FAQ: http://www.sljfaq.org/afaq/afaq.html
Travers Naran
> Evidence of another Wikipedia expert at work:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
>
> What does "muchan" make of this?
I had this discussion with my NSOJ pen-pal. He assures me that it's
common for guys who are good friends to call each other -chan -- even
old men. I'd be curious to hear other NSOJ comments on this.
muchan
> Evidence of another Wikipedia expert at work:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
>
> What does "muchan" make of this?
"Adult men never call other adult men -chan, as it as seen as an insult.
(An exception to this is if the two men are close childhood friends,
when it can be used uninsultingly.)"
This, simply is not true. Among friends or colleagues, it's very often
that we call adult men with -chan. Never say "never".
Calling Kin-chan, Samma-chan, etc., are not seen as an insult.
The prime minister is also called as "Jun-chan" by some of his colleagues...
In my case, when meeting Japanese people for the first time, I introduce
my self with my official name, or family name, and add
koko-dewa "muchan" de toottemasu.
And usually they smile and later call me muchan. Simply witout any insult.
When my friend introduces me to someone else, often they first say "muchan",
then add "honto-no namae-wa...".
Normal reaction is smile, and "aa naruhodo, mu-chan desuka."
BTW, putting "Beat Takeshi" in the section of nickname is not good idea.
It's not "adana", but it is (was?) "gaimei".
>
> Also, a serious question:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Y%C5%8Don
>
> Any answers?
>
This is question for Bart, Zhen Lin, and Ueshiba-san...
muchan
Zhen Lin
> Ben Bullock wrote:
>> Also, a serious question:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Y%C5%8Don
>>
>> Any answers?
>>
>
> This is question for Bart, Zhen Lin, and Ueshiba-san...
>
> muchan
I am guessing the わ was not actually 捨て仮名 back when it was being
spelt that way. Is it a 拗音 or not? Japanese Wikipedia says: yes - 合拗
音, as opposed to 開拗音.
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%8B%97%E9%9F%B3
Of course, /kwa/ etc. are alive and well once more in modern Japanese,
if only in 外来語, and written with 捨て仮名 from ワ行. Not to mention
other new ones like シェ and テュ.
Now a good question would be: are ティ [ti], イェ [je], ヲゥ [wu], ヴァ
[va] and ファ [fa] and so on considered 拗音? They are have neither
palatalised nor labialised consonants (well, you might argue [f] is
simply /hw/). But by some overly simple definitions of 拗音, such as,
one mora (拍) written with two 仮名, they are.
Marc Adler
> It's not "adana", but it is (was?) "gaimei".
"Geimei"?
「芸名」？それとも外国用に使う名前で「外名」？
Marc
Bart Mathias
> [...], a serious question:
I had at least one professor who called the insertion of a "w" *sound*
after a syllable-initial consonant "wawation" (after the Hebrew
letter?). But neither Webster's Collegiate nor Google know such a term
so it should probably be avoided.
CyV was termed "yoticization." That gets one googlit, and, spelt with a
"d," two only one of which applies. Webster's C. knows "yod," but
neither spelling of the process.
Bart
Bart Mathias
Golly gee! I've never run into such a definition. For 45 years I've
understood 拗音 to refer to a post-initial glide.
What in the world is ヲゥ [wu]? Assuming [w] is a glide made with
rounded lips and [u] is a vowel made with rounded lips, how could [wu]
differ from [u]?
Anyone who wants to "argue [f] is *simply* /hw/)" [emphasis mine] might
be setting himself up a nasty phonotactic problem. At least for the
stage of Japanese I'm familiar with (admittedly, I'm *way* behind the
times) where some people managed [Fa] (but perhaps more were beginning
to say [Fua]?) but where /kwa/ etc. had not yet quite made it into
Japanese proper.
Bart
Ben Bullock
Here's another one, just for interest this time:
I like the bit about "I previously noticed that the word for "thank you"
sounds very similar in japanese and portuguese." It's amazing how many
people seem to independently notice this.
Paul Blay
> Thank you to Bart, muchan and Zhen Lin for answers to the previous query.
>
> Here's another one, just for interest this time:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Japanese_words_of_Portuguese_origin&curid=2883729&diff=46188348&oldid=38255913
Talking about talking about words of Portuguese origin did
you check out the words listed in Edict as such that I
posted in your thread of the 18th March?
Zhen Lin
> CyV was termed "yoticization." That gets one googlit, and, spelt with a
> "d," two only one of which applies. Webster's C. knows "yod," but
> neither spelling of the process.
I'm familiar with it as 'iotation', though the term is primarily used in
Slavic linguistics. Named after Greek iota.
Zhen Lin
> What in the world is ヲゥ [wu]? Assuming [w] is a glide made with
> rounded lips and [u] is a vowel made with rounded lips, how could [wu]
> differ from [u]?
But somehow, it does. In English, 'to woo', 'woman', 'wolf', amongst
others.
muchan
Typo. I meant "Geimei" 「芸名」. thanks.
muchan
Chris Kern
the following:
>Ben Bullock wrote:
>> Evidence of another Wikipedia expert at work:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
>>
>> What does "muchan" make of this?
>
> "Adult men never call other adult men -chan, as it as seen as an insult.
> (An exception to this is if the two men are close childhood friends,
> when it can be used uninsultingly.)"
>
>This, simply is not true.
I can almost guarantee that was written by an anime fan. Anime fans
have managed to construct this elaborate explanation of various
honorifics (most of which is incorrect) in order to pretend like they
know the Japanese language. I think honorific suffixes were focused
on because they're easy to identify when you're watching anime.
-Chris
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
Ben Bullock
news:96cq2299f27rbvf6q...@4ax.com...
> I can almost guarantee that was written by an anime fan. Anime fans
> have managed to construct this elaborate explanation of various
> honorifics (most of which is incorrect) in order to pretend like they
> know the Japanese language. I think honorific suffixes were focused
> on because they're easy to identify when you're watching anime.
My experience of editing Wikipedia made me feel very much like Charles
Eicher seemed to about anime fans. There are buckets of articles in
Wikipedia with names like "josei" or "kodomo" which are exclusively about
anime/manga. An especially priceless example of ignorant anime fans at work
is the article "Oyaji". And it's not just language; they also mess up
virtually anything else to do with Japan. I know the people editing Japanese
history articles get really fed up because articles about historical figures
end up with huge lists of appearances of the historical figure in
manga/anime attached, and unfortunately it's hard to remove the information
because of Wikipedia's "democratic" process and the weight of numbers of the
anime fans. Another good example of articles by ignorant anime fans are
things like "Office Lady", or "kawaii", etc. etc. Anyway, Charles was right
about these people.
Paul Blay
> Talking about talking about words of Portuguese origin did
> you check out the words listed in Edict as such that I
> posted in your thread of the 18th March?
>
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.lang.japan/browse_thread/thread/d65ec628aea41469/f389e6172cbbc9c2?hl=en#f389e6172cbbc9c2
Maybe somebody kind could point Mr Head-in-sand in the direction of this
post.
Chris Kern
<benkasmi...@gmail.com> posted the following:
>I know the people editing Japanese
>history articles get really fed up because articles about historical figures
>end up with huge lists of appearances of the historical figure in
>manga/anime attached,
I don't personally see the problem with this -- there's no limit on
the length of an article, so it's not like if people add the
"appearances in popular culture" section that it prevents other
information from being put in there. It's not the same thing as
inaccurate information.
In fact, can you provide any good reason why a "appearances in popular
culture" section does not belong in an article about a historical
figure?
Ben Bullock
Yes, I can. Do you read those lists of appearances in popular culture? Does
anyone? Thought not. So, there's a good reason to remove them; nobody wants
to read them.
An encyclopedia article should have a focus on one topic, and it's
inappropriate to have huge lists of trivia tacked on to an article about
history. Further, nobody needs this information. It's whether you see
Wikipedia articles as something which people might want to read to find
information, or just a convenient lamppost for every dog to pee onto. Almost
nobody actually needs or wants to read these enormous trivia lists; they
only exist so that the manga fans can make their little marks everywhere.
Bart Mathias
No way! Japanese is a five-vowel system. English has a bunch, so we
can do things like [wUw], [wUl], [jIj, jIr], etc. Gliding implies movement.
Bart
Bart Mathias
Inneresting. That got 143 googlits, many worthless but some appropriate.
The professor I would first ascribe usage of the word I (might) remember
is the venerable Peter Boodberg, a native Russian (possibly Jewish?),
who spoke Greek and Russian and Chinese (and probably Hebrew among many
others). It is possible that I added the "-iciz-," although it sounds
very familiar to me. In parallel with "wawation," one would expect
"yodation," which Google finds 12 times, at least twice validly.
I was even impelled to search the world's most disordered small bookcase
for my copy of _Selected works of Peter A. Boodberg_ in hopes that a few
minutes skimming might reveal what form he actually did use, but who
knows--the works selected might not even include the term. At any rate
it wasn't in the 0.03% or so I skimmed.
Bart
Zhen Lin
> Yes, I can. Do you read those lists of appearances in popular culture?
> Does anyone? Thought not. So, there's a good reason to remove them;
> nobody wants to read them.
I do, and I can certainly imagine anthropologists will.
> An encyclopedia article should have a focus on one topic, and it's
> inappropriate to have huge lists of trivia tacked on to an article about
> history.
That's if the article is about history. Generally not the case - the
articles are about people, events, places, things.
> Further, nobody needs this information.
Justify the existence of section 6.12, 9.1, 9.5 10.4, 13.1 and 13.8 in
your FAQ.
Zhen Lin
> It is possible that I added the "-iciz-," although it sounds
> very familiar to me.
Possibly interference from rhotacisation. (I'm still wondering where the
-tac- comes from. Then again, the adjective is rhotic, after all...)
Chris Kern
<benkasmi...@gmail.com> posted the following:
>they
>only exist so that the manga fans can make their little marks everywhere.
I think this is the punchline -- you don't like them because they're
associated with manga or anime. You can't honestly say you have any
conception of how many people read it or how many people are
interested in it.
I'll tell you what, if you can do the following two things, I will
personally go through every historical article and delete the
"appearances in popular culture section":
1. Show me the place in Wikipedia's rules or suggestions where it says
that if an article will be of interest to only a narrow segment of the
population, it should not be written.
2. Prove that "appearances in popular culture" sections are read by
few people.
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>Ben Bullock wrote:
>> Yes, I can. Do you read those lists of appearances in popular culture?
>> Does anyone? Thought not. So, there's a good reason to remove them;
>> nobody wants to read them.
>
>I do, and I can certainly imagine anthropologists will.
It's more interesting when the information is not confined to a simple
listing of media, but discusses trends in the portrayal. For
instance, it's an interesting bit of information that Oda Nobunaga is
often portrayed in popular culture fiction as being sort of an evil,
demonic trickster.
Do you need to know that? Of course not. But I would argue that you
don't need to know who Oda Nobunaga is at all.
Ben Bullock
> On Sat, 1 Apr 2006 09:24:27 +0900, "Ben Bullock"
> <benkasmi...@gmail.com> posted the following:
>
>>they
>>only exist so that the manga fans can make their little marks everywhere.
>
> I think this is the punchline -- you don't like them because they're
> associated with manga or anime. You can't honestly say you have any
> conception of how many people read it or how many people are
> interested in it.
>
> I'll tell you what, if you can do the following two things, I will
> personally go through every historical article and delete the
> "appearances in popular culture section":
If you post it on the "Japanese Wikipedians noticeboard", you'll be regarded
as a kind of hero. I don't think such a trend will last since it is easy to
reverse edits. As for your proofs, I don't have time to provide one.
Ben Bullock
news:442e7...@news.tm.net.my...
> Ben Bullock wrote:
>> Further, nobody needs this information.
>
> Justify the existence of section 6.12, 9.1, 9.5 10.4, 13.1 and 13.8 in
> your FAQ.
The section numbering in my FAQ is done automatically, so I have no idea
what you are referring to with the numbers alone. They also change if I add
a new section. If you want to discuss a particular article, please give the
title rather than the number.
Ben Bullock
> On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 20:48:16 +0800, Zhen Lin <lo...@hotmail.com>
> posted the following:
>
>>Ben Bullock wrote:
>>> Yes, I can. Do you read those lists of appearances in popular culture?
>>> Does anyone? Thought not. So, there's a good reason to remove them;
>>> nobody wants to read them.
>>
>>I do, and I can certainly imagine anthropologists will.
>
> It's more interesting when the information is not confined to a simple
> listing of media, but discusses trends in the portrayal. For
> instance, it's an interesting bit of information that Oda Nobunaga is
> often portrayed in popular culture fiction as being sort of an evil,
> demonic trickster.
It might be a good idea to try asking the people who write the historical
articles about Oda Nobunaga what they think about the "popular culture"
stuff, which is basically just long, boring, disjointed, pointless lists of
crap about manga, added on to their article. I don't see Jeff Schrepfer
around these parts much any more, but he used to write lots of Wikipedia
history articles, and I'm sure he'd agree with me. You could also try on the
"Japanese Wikipedians notice board" if you want to get some more reactions.
It's interesting that we've managed to dredge up two people on
sci.lang.japan who actually claim to want to read the so-called "fancruft"
in Wikipedia articles. Perhaps Chris and Zhen like reading the phone book as
well. Anyway.
Chris Kern
<benkasmi...@gmail.com> posted the following:
>It might be a good idea to try asking the people who write the historical
>articles about Oda Nobunaga what they think about the "popular culture"
>stuff,
Their opinion is not relevant -- writing a Wikipedia article does not
give you ownership of the article, nor does it give you the right to
reject information because you find it lowbrow or uninteresting.
>which is basically just long, boring, disjointed, pointless lists of
>crap about manga, added on to their article.
Boring to you, perhaps interesting to other people.
If someone wanted to write a paper on the portrayal of Oda Nobunaga in
popular culture, for instance, the Wikipedia page provides a good list
of sources from which one could research the issue. It is likely one
of the only places on the Internet where you could get such
information.
Honestly I thought that with the departure of Charles Eicher, slj had
seen the last of this elitism, but apparently you've popped up to take
his mantle.
Paul Blay
>> Ben Bullock wrote:
>
>>> Further, nobody needs this information.
>>
>> Justify the existence of section 6.12, 9.1, 9.5 10.4, 13.1 and 13.8 in
>> your FAQ.
>
> The section numbering in my FAQ is done automatically, so I have no idea
> what you are referring to with the numbers alone.
You could always, I don't know, READ YOUR FAQ.
> They also change if I add a new section.
Added a new section since 1:48pm?
I wouldn't mind discussing
6.12.2. Which Japanese words originate from Portuguese?
and
7.7. What is an ikemen?
but I guess protecting your fragile worldview by kill-filing me
is more important than improving the accuracy and completeness of
your FAQ.
Chris Kern
<benkasmi...@gmail.com> posted the following:
>As for your proofs, I don't have time to provide one.
Don't have time, or cannot?
Once again, your points are completely groundless if you cannot prove
that Wikipedia exists to provide only certain kinds of information.
It is not Ben Bullockpedia, or Serious Historianspedia, or anything
else -- one of the main, fundamental ideas of Wikipedia is that it
allows for the writing of *any* information, not just information that
a certain segment of the population deems worthy.
In any case, the information is rarely obtrusive. Take the Tokugawa
Ieyasu article, for instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokugawa_Ieyasu
The main part of the article is 4,500 words and does not mention
anime, manga, or any other popular portrayal a single time. Then at
the very end of the article, segregated from the main section, is a
mere 380 word section listing a few sources of popular portrayal (with
an emphasis on manga/anime, but also listing a Kurosawa film and a few
novels). People who are uninterested in the pop culture portrayals
can simply read the initial sections and skip the final part. But
calling for the wholesale deletion of it just because you don't
personally find the information interesting runs counter to the basis
of what Wikipedia is.
Wikipedia has clear guidelines on what is not suitable for inclusion,
but "some people won't find it interesting" is not one of those
guidelines.
muchan
>
> Honestly I thought that with the departure of Charles Eicher, slj had
> seen the last of this elitism, but apparently you've popped up to take
> his mantle.
>
But after departure of Charles, slj didn't become the forum to discuss
about tattoo and anime, I think we are at something even without him. ;)
muchan
muchan
> 7.7. What is an ikemen?
"New word" I saw the first time yesterday was "ikesaa".
Can you (if you don't know it yet) guess it without google/yahoo?
muchan
Paul Blay
muchan
Oops. It wasn't "ikesaa" but "ibesaa". Now can you?
muchan
Paul Blay
>>> "New word" I saw the first time yesterday was "ikesaa".
>>> Can you (if you don't know it yet) guess it without google/yahoo?
>>
>> Short answer, No.
>
> Oops. It wasn't "ikesaa" but "ibesaa". Now can you?
Ibiza?
muchan
> "muchan" <muc...@promikra.si> wrote ...
>
>> Paul Blay wrote:
>>
>>> "muchan" <muc...@promikra.si> wrote ...
>>>
>>>> "New word" I saw the first time yesterday was "ikesaa".
>>>> Can you (if you don't know it yet) guess it without google/yahoo?
>>>
>>>
>>> Short answer, No.
>>
>>
>> Oops. It wasn't "ikesaa" but "ibesaa". Now can you?
>
>
> Ibiza?
No, ibe-saa. 「イベサー」
I saw it on the article about the director of USEN.
(This accronim also, I was reading U.S.E.N, and later learned
it was about 有線放送。8)
now you can google.
(but then be silent for a while, to give others chance to guess.)
muchan
Paul Blay
>
> No, ibe-saa. 「イベサー」
Hey I wouldn't put it past _me_ to pronounce Ibiza イベサー :-P
> I saw it on the article about the director of USEN.
> (This accronim also, I was reading U.S.E.N, and later learned
> it was about 有線放送。8)
>
> now you can google.
> (but then be silent for a while, to give others chance to guess.)
Smells like 和製英語 to me.
muchan
If you say パソコン is also 和製英語...
<BTW> These days I saw "sudoku" (and even solved some).
Now I won't say that word doesn't exist, but still I say it is not
Japanese word...
1) /sudoku/ in Japanese is 「素読」 (still insisting)
2) To read 「数独」 it should be /suudoku/.
3) The originator should call it 「数字は単独に限る」instead of 独身
but having such opinion doesn't obstacle me from solving some...
</BTW>
muchan
Paul Blay
> Paul Blay wrote:
>> Smells like 和製英語 to me.
>
> If you say パソコン is also 和製英語...
Ah but the two English words that form the basis of パソコン
were commonly used together with that meaning in English.
I take it イベサー doesn't refer to the term used in nuclear
physics.
> <BTW> These days I saw "sudoku" (and even solved some).
> Now I won't say that word doesn't exist, but still I say it is not
> Japanese word...
> 1) /sudoku/ in Japanese is 「素読」 (still insisting)
> 2) To read 「数独」 it should be /suudoku/.
I suppose Ito isn't a Japanese name either then.
muchan
>>
>>> Smells like 和製英語 to me.
>>
>> If you say パソコン is also 和製英語...
>
>
> Ah but the two English words that form the basis of パソコン
> were commonly used together with that meaning in English.
>
> I take it イベサー doesn't refer to the term used in nuclear
> physics.
>
I think イベサー doesn't refer to the term used in nuclear physics.
one more hint.. it could be イヴェサー...
>> <BTW> These days I saw "sudoku" (and even solved some).
>> Now I won't say that word doesn't exist, but still I say it is not
>> Japanese word...
>> 1) /sudoku/ in Japanese is 「素読」 (still insisting)
>> 2) To read 「数独」 it should be /suudoku/.
>
>
> I suppose Ito isn't a Japanese name either then.
>
Sure, Itoo is Japanese name. :)
or if there is 糸さん or 伊戸さん, it's Japanese family name. :)
>> 3) The originator should call it 「数字は単独に限る」instead of 独身
>> but having such opinion doesn't obstacle me from solving some...
>> </BTW>
>
Ciao
muchan
Paul Blay
> Paul Blay wrote:
>>>
>>>> Smells like 和製英語 to me.
>>>
>>> If you say パソコン is also 和製英語...
>>
>> Ah but the two English words that form the basis of パソコン
>> were commonly used together with that meaning in English.
>>
>> I take it イベサー doesn't refer to the term used in nuclear
>> physics.
>
> I think イベサー doesn't refer to the term used in nuclear physics.
>
> one more hint.. it could be イヴェサー...
No need to hint - I know what it is - but I don't think it's a commonly
used term with that meaning in English.
Sean
<muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
I've been thinking about having ドラえもん tattooed on my butt. What do you
think?
Ben Bullock
news:C0572066.AF86%not...@fake.ca...
It'll be a "cool kanji tattoo".
Sho
"muchan" <muc...@promikra.si> wrote in message
news:8vMWf.1298$oj5.5...@news.siol.net...
> Ben Bullock wrote:
> > Evidence of another Wikipedia expert at work:
> >
> >
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
> >
> > What does "muchan" make of this?
>
> "Adult men never call other adult men -chan, as it as seen as an
insult.
> (An exception to this is if the two men are close childhood friends,
> when it can be used uninsultingly.)"
>
> This, simply is not true. Among friends or colleagues, it's very often
> that we call adult men with -chan. Never say "never".
> Calling Kin-chan, Samma-chan, etc., are not seen as an insult.
> The prime minister is also called as "Jun-chan" by some of his
colleagues...
>
> In my case, when meeting Japanese people for the first time, I
introduce
> my self with my official name, or family name, and add
> koko-dewa "muchan" de toottemasu.
> And usually they smile and later call me muchan. Simply witout any
insult.
> When my friend introduces me to someone else, often they first say
"muchan",
> then add "honto-no namae-wa...".
> Normal reaction is smile, and "aa naruhodo, mu-chan desuka."
Accepting all that you say here, I can't think of introducing myself as
Sho-chan to anyone, and I feel certain that I represent by far the great
majority. True, I myself would feel flattered and my hana-no-shita would
be elongated, if some young woman addressed me as such, but given the
limited space on that page, I wouldn't particularly find anything wrong
with the way someone has rendered the part shown in red as such.
Sho
Ben Bullock
news:vmlYf.354$FL1...@news-virt.s-kddi1.home.ne.jp...
> "muchan" <muc...@promikra.si> wrote in message
> news:8vMWf.1298$oj5.5...@news.siol.net...
>> Ben Bullock wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
>> >
>> > What does "muchan" make of this?
> Sho-chan to anyone, and I feel certain that I represent by far the great
> majority. True, I myself would feel flattered and my hana-no-shita would
> be elongated, if some young woman addressed me as such, but given the
> limited space on that page, I wouldn't particularly find anything wrong
> with the way someone has rendered the part shown in red as such.
It's a shame someone decided to remove it then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&diff=next&oldid=46228120
Sean
<benkasmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, that's what I thought. I'll post a jpeg after I've had it done.
That area of the body already sort of looks like a どら焼き tipped on its
side, anyway.
Sho
"Ben Bullock" <benkasmi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e0stda$97l$1...@ml.accsnet.ne.jp...
> >> Ben Bullock wrote:
> >
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&curid=164225&diff=45378787&oldid=44981601
> It's a shame someone decided to remove it then:
Isn't it because you did something about it? Admittedly, calling an
adult XXX-chan "is seen as an insult" is a bit too strong. It _could_ be
seen as an insult, depending on the tone of voice, the general flow of
the conversation, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_name&diff=next&oldid=46228120
Sho
dst...@gmail.com
Ben Bullock
news:1144153814.8...@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> What did this Charles Eicher have to say about anime fans then ?
If you search for "anime" and "Charles Eicher" on Google Groups, you can
find something.
Charles is alive and well and blogging away at http://ceicher.homeunix.com/.
His latest entry features a punched card for programming computers.
Paul Blay
> What did this Charles Eicher have to say about anime fans then ?
Lots, much of which was rubbish. But that's what Google's for.
group: sci.lang.japan
include at least one of: manga anime
author: Eicher
First thread that turned up was this monster,
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.lang.japan/browse_frm/thread/2356e379ad48ce6/54396285964e02c6
among which include such gems (paraphrased) as
"I have never met a manga fan who achieved any significant level of
Japanese, by which I would accept JLPT level 2"
The fact that I had achieved JLPT level 2 at the time
(and by now level 1) was taken as proof that
a) I wasn't really a manga fan.
and / or
b) I would have done even better if I hadn't damaged
my brain with manga.
Sean
1144153814.8...@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, "dst...@gmail.com"
<dst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What did this Charles Eicher have to say about anime fans then ?
>
Hah! Just google him up and learn a bunch of synonyms for "cretin."
Travers Naran
And have you noticed the mention of anime & manga in this group dropped
DRAMATICALLY after Charles left? ;-)
A friend of mine once suggested the story of "O" (Google for Charles'
rant) was actually Charles cryptically talking about himself (i.e., "O"
= Charles") :-)
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>What did this Charles Eicher have to say about anime fans then ?
Here's one of many examples:
"Adult manga fanatics are morons. Otaku who spend their time with
manga clubs and writing web pages about their favorite manga are
deluded idiots. They barely qualify as human."
Marc Adler
> No need to hint - I know what it is - but I don't think it's a commonly
> used term with that meaning in English.
Plus, doesn't the physics term use "horizon"? (Doh! Did I just give it
away? The first Google hit is "イベサーって何？！" so I doubt
many people don't know it by now.)
Incidentally, Paul, do you still post to 2channel?
Marc
Marc Adler
> I like the bit about "I previously noticed that the word for "thank you"
> sounds very similar in japanese and portuguese." It's amazing how many
> people seem to independently notice this.
Not more amazing than the independent production of "don't touch my
mustache" for どういたしまして. I've heard three people come up
with that.
Marc
Sean
1144276290.9...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "Marc Adler"
<ma...@adlerpacific.com> wrote:
I doubt they came up with it independently. I first heard it from my
Japanese professor in 1979 or so. And he told it to us in a manner that
suggested he'd been telling that joke for several decades.
Paul Blay
> Paul Blay wrote:
> > No need to hint - I know what it is - but I don't think it's a commonly
> > used term with that meaning in English.
>
> Plus, doesn't the physics term use "horizon"? (Doh! Did I just give it
> away?
Hmm, I don't think they are the same thing.
> The first Google hit is "イベサーって何？！" so I doubt
> many people don't know it by now.)
>
> Incidentally, Paul, do you still post to 2channel?
Been too busy recently. Er, never to busy to argue on slj of course. ;-)