Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
}}{{#if:|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
}}{{#if:|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
|On ], ''']''' was updated with {{#if:|facts|a fact}} from the article{{#if:|s|}} ''''']'''''{{#if:|{{#if:|, |, and}} ''''']'''''
}}{{#if:|{{#if:|, |, and}} ''''']'''''
}}{{#if:|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
I will reply to messages wherever they are posted. Thus, if you leave a message here, I will respond here. If I leave a message on your page, please respond on your page; I will be watching it.
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
Dear friend. Yes, it has been far too long. I was delighted with your note, and to hear from you. I would indeed like to contribute collaboratively to Japanese articles. I did promise to improve the Murayama Shichiro one - I have 7 of his books, well-thumbed, by me, languishing despite the best intentions. It is just that, call it masochistic scruple, I tend by character to put duty before pleasure: in this case, trying to correct a notoriously bad area of wiki by getting some balance, and notional and historical redress for a tragically misused people. I feel a twinge of conscience at the idea of doing comparatively easy articles, when so many are hard, because politicized, and lie in neglect. I reflect that your erudition here deserves as much companionate assistance as possible. Yet, that other area really monopolizes one's energies. Of course, as you may observe in the adieu in my last archive, I've forsaken even I/P articles until the grievous abuse, as I see it, of administrative powers is removed from my page. I decided not to do whatever I might be able to do for wiki articles generally, until this kind of gaming of the system by private off-page influence peddling stops. I only came back, and broke this undertaking, because, well, some things simply cry out for balance, and lives are at stake when so much hasbara has convinced the mainstream press to blinker down its critical or sceptical gaze, thereby disallowing, in the absence of precise information, a public awareness that we are, by this horror, and our own relative insouciance to it, drifting into madness.
Christ that sounds pompous. I'd better shut up. Archive this private letter immediately.
I don't exclude coming back to the Japanese materials, if I see some improvement in administrative oversight and balance in the I/P articles. It would be a relief. If, from time to time, there is some point where I might be able to imaginably dig up something you can't, let me know of course. Best wishes Nishidani (talk) 13:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Kanji
Hi! I reverted this and noticed incorrect information about 今朝. There's a word konchou, you know. . But I do not know how to correct it. It would be grateful if you have time and correct it. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 16:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi Mari. That edit which you reverted was correct. <kyō> and <kesa> are cognate (同源) in the initial morpheme (/ke/). Understanding the historical phonological changes and etymology should clarify the matter: > > * (ハ行転呼) > > . This initial /ke/ is cognate with /ka/ (日, cf. /ituka/, /kokonoka/ via vowel ablaut (母音交替) and means "day". /hu/ (or "fu" if you prefer), too, is cognate with /hi/ (日) again via vowel ablaut. <kesa> "this morning" is the same /ke/ "day" and /asa/ "morning". However, vowel clusters were not permitted in Old Japanese and they dropped out via elision. Hence, */ke.asa/ > /kesa.
The fact that 今朝 may also be read as konchō, a separate lexical term, is not really the point of the passage. The topic is the word <kesa> and how it is written in kanji, not just the kanji alone.
On April 27, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mumyōzōshi, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
