This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Between 900-1200 AD? The Ars Grammaticae Linguae Iaponicae, dated 1632, describes a Japanese that still retains prenasalized consonants (the author spells them with a tilde beforehand, e.g. Nãgasaqi) and they seem to be in place for some time after, though perhaps in the process of being lost (see, e.g., Lexicon Universale (1698) which shows both Yendo/Jendo and Jedo for Edo. [1] (and which also has Nangazachum — Muke Tever 14:40, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This articulation is retained to this day in some outlying regions. Perhaps he means the standard language. Although /g/ is a special case - intervocalic /g/ is (was? signs point towards loss of such articulation) pronounced [ŋ] in the Tokyo area. - 刘 (劉) 振霖 03:45, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
The focus of this article is not clear. It defines the time period as Japanese spoken during the Heian period following Old Japanese. However, it then goes on to state that it was the standard for many centuries until around the Meiji Restoration. There are two separate topics being described here. One is the Japanese language as used during the Heian period; this is known as 中古日本語 in Japanese. The other is 文語, the written style initially based on Heian period style and used for many centuries. The English term "Classical Japanese" is a little ambiguous as it can refer to both usages depending on the context. How shall we handle this? Discuss both in this article? Separate the two into two separate articles? (And if so, what will the article names be?) Discussing phonology, grammar, and vocabulary for 文語 is rather pointless: there are numerous differences in each era. I would hope at the very least that the main focus of this article would be Heian period Japanese.
I have been working on the Old Japanese language page. Once I am satisfied with that, I had planned on doing the same for this page. My interests lie mainly with the Japanese of the Nara and Heian periods. And to some extent, I would like to add entries for 中世 and 近世 Japanese as well. I hope these issues can be resolved before more work is done here. Bendono 05:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
On the Japanese WP the article 古文 is about an ancient style of script and is paired with English WP article Guwen. Gǔwén is the Mandarin Chinese reading of the same characters. However my understanding is that when Japanese highschoolers take a class in kobun they don't study a script but the classical literature of Japan. If one meaning of 古文 kobun is "Japanese classical literature" then it would be useful to say in this article that 文語 bungo is the language of 古文 kobun. At present there is no place on the English WP where the word 古文 kobun is defined. Contact Basemetal here 18:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I found this page while wondering why あふれる didn't become おうれる. The page does state that this is an exception:
"溢れる (あふれる) (afure-ru "overflow", expected form あおれる aore-ru or おうれる ōre-ru; the reasons for this different result will be explained by another rule below)"
But what is "another rule below"?
MaigoAkisame ( talk) 15:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 13:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Classical Japanese language → Classical Japanese – We should shorten this to just Classical Japanese. The word "language" is unnecessary, as demonstrated by the article Classical Chinese. If that article doesn't need to be at "Classical Chinese language", why does this one need such a title? Hko2333 ( talk) 20:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. — Amakuru ( talk) 23:55, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm a beginner when it comes to 文語, but the poster looks like 口語 to me. Especially with the "だ" in the first line. I haven't seen that in 文語 or 古文 before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:D5E0:4096:C84F:3C71:46E1:7855 ( talk) 23:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Between 900-1200 AD? The Ars Grammaticae Linguae Iaponicae, dated 1632, describes a Japanese that still retains prenasalized consonants (the author spells them with a tilde beforehand, e.g. Nãgasaqi) and they seem to be in place for some time after, though perhaps in the process of being lost (see, e.g., Lexicon Universale (1698) which shows both Yendo/Jendo and Jedo for Edo. [1] (and which also has Nangazachum — Muke Tever 14:40, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This articulation is retained to this day in some outlying regions. Perhaps he means the standard language. Although /g/ is a special case - intervocalic /g/ is (was? signs point towards loss of such articulation) pronounced [ŋ] in the Tokyo area. - 刘 (劉) 振霖 03:45, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
The focus of this article is not clear. It defines the time period as Japanese spoken during the Heian period following Old Japanese. However, it then goes on to state that it was the standard for many centuries until around the Meiji Restoration. There are two separate topics being described here. One is the Japanese language as used during the Heian period; this is known as 中古日本語 in Japanese. The other is 文語, the written style initially based on Heian period style and used for many centuries. The English term "Classical Japanese" is a little ambiguous as it can refer to both usages depending on the context. How shall we handle this? Discuss both in this article? Separate the two into two separate articles? (And if so, what will the article names be?) Discussing phonology, grammar, and vocabulary for 文語 is rather pointless: there are numerous differences in each era. I would hope at the very least that the main focus of this article would be Heian period Japanese.
I have been working on the Old Japanese language page. Once I am satisfied with that, I had planned on doing the same for this page. My interests lie mainly with the Japanese of the Nara and Heian periods. And to some extent, I would like to add entries for 中世 and 近世 Japanese as well. I hope these issues can be resolved before more work is done here. Bendono 05:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
On the Japanese WP the article 古文 is about an ancient style of script and is paired with English WP article Guwen. Gǔwén is the Mandarin Chinese reading of the same characters. However my understanding is that when Japanese highschoolers take a class in kobun they don't study a script but the classical literature of Japan. If one meaning of 古文 kobun is "Japanese classical literature" then it would be useful to say in this article that 文語 bungo is the language of 古文 kobun. At present there is no place on the English WP where the word 古文 kobun is defined. Contact Basemetal here 18:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I found this page while wondering why あふれる didn't become おうれる. The page does state that this is an exception:
"溢れる (あふれる) (afure-ru "overflow", expected form あおれる aore-ru or おうれる ōre-ru; the reasons for this different result will be explained by another rule below)"
But what is "another rule below"?
MaigoAkisame ( talk) 15:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 13:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Classical Japanese language → Classical Japanese – We should shorten this to just Classical Japanese. The word "language" is unnecessary, as demonstrated by the article Classical Chinese. If that article doesn't need to be at "Classical Chinese language", why does this one need such a title? Hko2333 ( talk) 20:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. — Amakuru ( talk) 23:55, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm a beginner when it comes to 文語, but the poster looks like 口語 to me. Especially with the "だ" in the first line. I haven't seen that in 文語 or 古文 before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:D5E0:4096:C84F:3C71:46E1:7855 ( talk) 23:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)