Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Classical Japanese 2

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Late Old Japanese Wikipedia[edit]

submitted verification final decision
This proposal has been rejected.
This decision was taken by the language committee in accordance with the Language proposal policy based on the discussion on this page.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

The language subcommittee's policy requires that new wikis be created in languages having living native communities. Classical Japanese is classified by ISO 639-3 as "historical", which means that it is an obsolete form of Japanese having no living native speakers. Unfortunately, this request does not meet the requirements for eligibility. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:03:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Here a discussion about a reconsideration of this last decision
Proposal summary
Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.

About Late Old Japanese

Late Old Japanese is the language which was spoken in the Heian period(794-1185). Japanese is one of the language which have a very long history, and Japanese spoken language had changed greatly as time passed. However, the written language had not changed greatly from the Heian period to the Meiji period(1868-1912) compared with the spoken language because Japanese written language was conservative. The model of the Japanese written language had been the vocabulary and grammar of Late Old Japanese. Incidentally, the works called gikobun was written in the Middle ages and Edo period. Gikobun means works which imitated Late Old Japanese sentences. Thus, Late Old Japanese is a language with the authority very much, a very important language for the Japanese, and a very important language for the foreigner to understand the Japanese culture.

The Teaching

The literary works written in Late Old Japanese is taught in a subject called "national language(国語)" in Japan. In junior high schools, the comparatively plain works such as The Tale of the Bamboo-Cutter or The Pillow Book are taught pupils. In senior high schools, Late Old Japanese grammar is taught students in detail, and they learn the famous works such as The Tale of Genji or Essays in Idleness. Thus, Late Old Japanese is widely studied.

The Literature

In Heian period, a lot of excellent literatures were written in Late Old Japanese, for example, The Tale of Genji, The Pillow Book, Tale of Bamboo-Cutter, and The Great Mirror, etc. These works are sold as paperbacks in all bookstores of Japan, and people can obtain them at a low price and easily.

The Dictionaries

There is a lot of kinds of dictionaries because Late Old Japanese is widely studied at junior high schools, high schools, universities, and so on. The dictionaries of Late Old Japanese is called Kogo jiten(古語辞典). An ordinary Kogo jiten collects the vocabulary of about 40,000. Kadokawa Kodo dai jiten(角川古語大辞典) that is one of the largest archaic Japanese dictionaries collects the vocabulary of about 100,000.-- 05:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]








古文は中学や高校、大学など、幅広く学ばれており、数多くの種類の古語辞典がある。一般的な古語辞典はだいたい四万ほどの語彙を収録している。最も大きな古語辞典の一つである角川古語大辞典はおよそ十万の語彙を収録している。-- 05:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

日本語: 文語版ウィキペディアも提案されています。
--楓山 20:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
English: This proposal was moved here from Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Classical Japanese. Summary of previous arguments (please correct if I am mistaken):
  • The language is different (and not automatically convertible) from modern Japanese.
  • The classical Japanese has more than a thousand years of history. Although it is more stable than the modern Japanese, it comprises several different styles, with notable contrast between 和文体 (purely Japanese style) and 漢文訓読体 (the style inspired by word-to-word translation of classical Chinese), as well as the mixed styles of the two. A specific guideline is necessary.
    • Some propose 和文体 with basically the vocabulary from Heian era.
    • But it seems difficult to write an encyclopedia in pure 和文体, given the Chinese influence on our language that predicated the development of our conceptual framework. The project will be far more feasible if we tolerate later styles, as they were widely used in formal writing up to just sixty years ago.
    • What about punctuation?
  • Are there Japanese people here? If not, the project would never succeed.

More on the old proposal page.

日本語: この提案はこちらから移動してきました。これまでに指摘されたこと(誤りや不足があれば訂正してください):
  • 口語とは別の言葉であり、自動変換は不可能。
  • 千年をこえる歴史をもつ文語は、口語に比べると一貫して受け継がれてはいるものの、いくつかの文体、とくに和文体と漢文訓読体の違いがある。文体についての具体的な目安が必要。
    • 平安時代の語彙を使った和文体にしよう。
    • しかし現在の我々の知識の構築を支えた漢文体の影響を考えると、百科事典にふさわしい広汎な内容を和文体で記すのはあまりに困難。明治から戦前まで使われたような純度の低い文語文を使う/許すのが現実的では。
    • 句読点はどうするか。
  • ちゃんと日本人が参加しているのか。


--LQVX 07:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • このウィキペディアは和文体で百科事典を記そうとするものである。
  • 従って、語彙、文体などは平安時代の文学作品、擬古文などに基づく。
    • 賛成していただける方はメタウィキのアカウントを取得し、Arguments in favourという所にSupportと書き、古文版の意義等をお書き下さい。運営に興味のある方は上のUsers interested in forming an editing communityに署名してください。-- 04:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arguments in favour[edit]

Japanese language have the long history, and Japanese spoken language had changed very much as time passed. However, Japanese written language had been written based on grammar and vocabulary of Archaic Japanese up to modern times. That is why I think that Archaic Japanese have considerable value linguistically.
There are many people who know archaic Japanese, because it is teached in Japanese junior high school and high school and so on. In addition, there are many experts on archaic Japanese. Therefore many people will participate this project, if it has established.
Ordinary Archaic Japanese dictionaries contain about 40,000 words. For example, 新明解古語辞典(It is one of Archaic Japanese dictionaries) contains about 45,000 words and 小学館古語大辞典(It is one of Archaic Japanese unabridgeds) contain 55,000 words. From this, Archaic Japanese has a rich vocabulary as a classical language. Therefore I think that Archaic Japanese will be able to explain many kind of things and concepts.
And, There are many literatures which are written in archaic Japanese. For example The Tale of Genji, The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter, The Tales of Ise, The Great Mirror and so on. In addition, from Edo period to Meiji period, literatures imitated archaic Japanese had been written by Norinaga Motoori and Chikage Katoh, Harumi Murata, Reijo Arakida and so on.
 それに、古文で書かれた文献は沢山残っています。例えば、源氏物語、竹取物語、伊勢物語、大鏡などです。さらに、江戸時代から明治時代にかけて、古文をまねた文章が本居宣長や加藤千蔭、村田春海、荒木田麗女らによって書かれました。-- 10:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC) rewriting-- 06:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(en) I think that this project will become an interesting one.(translation by 06:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
(en) Let's start this project at all cost. It is an interesting project.(translation by 01:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Support. What is called Classical Japanese today is the written language modeled on the spoken language of the Heian era in which the court culture flourished, and therefore had since been considered as the authentic style particularly for literature even after the unity of written style and spoken style was rather successfully initiated not long after the Meiji Restoration.
Even though the use of the classical Japanese language ceased to be often seen in the everyday situation after WWII, its grammar and the major works written in it are taught as well as those of the modern language in the present-day Japanese education, considerably because of a timeless classic, the Tale of Genji.
Today much more people may read the works in the classical Japanese language than write, but yet the classical Japanese version of Wikipedia should be much as interesting and meaningful as the Old English, the Sanskritic versions and so on.
夫れ今日古語と云はるるは、宮廷文化の栄華を極めたる平安(中古)期に行はれし言語を範とせる書記言語にて、爾来それが為に、明治維新後暫くして言文一致がよろしく創始せられし後すら、なかんづく文学方面に於きては正統なる文体として認められしなり。先の大戦後、古語の実用日用に供せらるをさほどには見られずなりしかども、現代国文は勿論、古語文法および古典は、なほ現代日本の教育にて教授せられたり。そは不朽の古典たる源氏物語に因ること大なり。今日、古語にて著作するよりは古典を読むこそいみじく多からめども、即纂百科事典古語版を興すは、古英語版、梵語版等と同様、興味ありまた有意義なるべし。--Prociono 14:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(en) I sympathize with this project.(translation by 01:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
(en)Let's realize this project at all cost. The project will contribute toward understanding archaic Japanese.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Support. 支持します

世界には翻訳された日本の古典が山のようにあります。 英語の例をとると、ダノー・キーン(Donald Keene)という日本の文学専門家が日本の古典の大量の英訳をだしています。私の知っているだけでも、万葉集、古事記、懐風藻、伊勢物語、古今集、土佐日記、かげろう日記、源氏物語、枕草子、紫式部日記、平家物語、新古今集等が訳されております。中には、日本語の本来の意味を捉えるために、原文を載せているものもあります(特に詩などは)。

それに、戦後GHQによって日本の文体は大きく変えられたと認識しています。 現在は旧字体はすべて新字体に改められました。 いわゆる歴史と伝統文化の断絶です。余談ですが、GHQは平家物語に全文にわたって、黒い墨を塗って読めないようにしたことで有名です。

GHQは将来的には漢字をすべて廃止しようとしていた。 手始めに、小学校で実験をしたそうですが、ひらがなだけの生徒の成績が極端に下がったために、この案は廃止されたと聞いています。 私は漢字を使うことは、別に中国文化に依存していることにならないと思います。 平安期においては、日本は中国の古典も楽しんでいたし、中国の古典を知っていることは貴族達の教養でもありました。しかし、何も中国を崇拝していたわけではありません。平安期には、中国との公に大きな交流は20年ほどで、その間に学べることや持ち込める技術(医療等)や文学もすべて持ち込んで、その後はあまり大きな交流はしていなかったと聞いています(伝聞ですが)。これは、日本がすでに自国に誇れる文化を持っていたからだとも聞いています。

だから私は漢字を使うことに対しては、別に問題ないと思います。ただ、使うなら旧字体を使って欲しいですね。 --蘭陵王 20:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(en)I support this project.
There are a lot of Japanese classics which are translated all over the world. Donald Keene who is an expert in Japanese literature translated a large number of Japanese classics from Japanese into English. As far as I know, Manyoshu(万葉集), Kojiki(古事記), Kaifuso(懐風藻), The Tale of Ise(伊勢物語), Kokin Wakashu(古今集), The Diary of Tosa(土佐日記), The Diary of Kagero(蜻蛉日記), The Tale of Genji(源氏物語), The Pillow Book(枕草子), The Murasaki Shikibu Diary(紫式部日記), The Tale of the Heike(平家物語) and Shin Kokin Wakashu(新古今集) and so on had been translated. Some translations carry originals to explain the meanings.
I think that Japanese written language had been changed considerably by Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers (SCAP) after the Second World War. Kyu jitai(旧字体, old character form or traditional chinese character) had changed into shin jitai(新字体, new character form). This means that history and traditinal culture had ceased. By the way, it is well-known that SCAP had black out the full text of The Tale of the Heike not to let Japanese people read it.
SCAP had attempted to abolish Chinese character. But the idea had withdrawed because the grades of students who learn only hiragana had slipped extremely when SCAP had experimented on students in a elementary school. I think that it is not dependence on the culture of China to use Chinese character. In Heian period (794-1185), Japanese people enjoy Chinese classics and it is education for Japanese noblemen to learn Chinese classics. Japanese people, however, had not adored China. Official exchanges between Japan and China had continued only 20 years in Heian period and Japanese people study skill and literature as much as possible from China. And they had not exchanged since then because Japan had already had marvelous culture.
Threfore I think that it is no problem to use Chinese character. And, I want to use Kyu jitai.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
(en)It is a good project. I hope it is established. Japanese classics is important to comprehend languages.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
(en)I like reading the collected works of Japanese classics and this project is wonderful to me.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Supportこれをきっかけに日本の古典の素晴らしさが、世界に広がれば良いと思います。--misa 9:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
(en)I wish this project prompt to introduce Japanese classics as womderful literatures.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
(en)This project will make meaningful contributions to the study of a system of language.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Support ゲール語ほか英国古語のウィキがあることから

--Tanakatakashi 19:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(en)I support this project because the Goidelic and the Old English wikipedia exist.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Support 大変すばらしいプロジェクトです。古典に触れ古典に学ぶことは文化の発展にとって必要不可欠です。また、文語文と平安時代の文章は決定的に違うと思います。--Futonin 04:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(en)This is a very splendid project. It is indispensable to development of culture to touch a classic and to learn in classics. In addition, I think that modern written language and sentences of the Heian era are different crucially.(translation by 06:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Support 平安朝の文学を公に広く紹介する意義は、日本人による古文の学習のみに留まらず、古文を英語をはじめとした諸言語に翻訳する人物の育成にも強く通ずると信じる。Wikipediaの資源とは、すなわちこの百科事典を編集する人材である。平安時代に執筆された有名な日本の古典である「源氏物語」はもののあわれを記した、日本人の原点とも言える書物である。そういったものを古来用いられてきた言葉で解説を試みることは、日本の中等教育における一つの大きな貢献である。また、生涯学習を望む多くの同胞はもちろんのこと、日本の伝統的な文化に関心を寄せる多くの外国人にとって、このプロジェクトは翻訳を要する技術的な要因のみに留まらず、日本を理解するための機能的な規範となる可能性を秘めているのではないか。

百科事典を形作るのは人だと堅く信じるゆえ、私はこのプロジェクトを支持したい。--ゑのけん 02:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(en)Significance to introduce literature of the Heian era to widely publicly is not confined to only learning of archaic Japanese by Japanese and I believe strongly that this project will help cultivation of the person who translates literature of the Heian era from archaic Japanese into many languages mainly English. The resources of Wikipedia is talent who edit this encyclopedia. The Tale of Genji which is a famous Japanese classic is a literary work which may be said that it is the origin of Japanese people. It is one big contribution in Japanese secondary education to try a explanation with the language which has been used since ancient times. In addition, this project may have a functional model to understand Japan for the foreigners who has interests in Japanese traditional culture ,not to mention many Japanese expecting life study.

Because I believe that it is a person that form an encyclopedia firmly, I want to support this project. (translation by 06:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]

  • Support 面白い上に学術的にも意味がある。世界初の長編小説である源氏物語(出典:朝日新聞社週刊しゃかぽん8号[1])を読みたい外国の人もいるだろう。Pochi1996 14:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(en) Not only just interesting, it also meaningful for scholarship. It is true, there are foreigner who want to read the 'The Tale of Genji' which called the world's first novel. (citation: Asahi Weekly Shakapon vol.8[2]) (translated by Masoris 17:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]
  • Support I think this Wikipedia could be useful textbook for Classical Japanese students. --Masoris 17:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support I think this new wiki in the Old Japanese language would be usefull not only for Japanese students but also foreign students and schoolars. As a person, who is engaged in Japanese studies, I support this initiative with both hands!ただ、提案者たちが頑張りきれるかな。ちゃんとした古語wikiを作成すろのに希望のほほかに時間・知識・能力が必要ですが。まあ、それにしても応援しています!--Alex K 03:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I'm sorry, I don't know how to fill in the section. Anyway, I agree. I agree strongly.(translation by 05:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Arguments against[edit]


  (1)  当該言語を母語とする人が多い。

  (2)  当該言語が(書き言葉を含めて)国際的に広く知られている。

 古典日本語は (1),(2) のいずれも満たさないので,ウェブ百科事典にはふさわしくない。

Unnecessary. (1) Many people speak the language as their mother tongue. (2) The language, including written case, is internationally understood by many people. Classical Japanese is not suitable for the web encyclopedia, because the language does not meet (1) nor (2).

(1)Archaic Japanese is dead language. Equally, Latin and Classical Chinese are dead language, but the wikipedia which are written in these language are exist. Therefore (1) is not good reason to reject the proposal to establish Archaic Japanese wikipedia.
(2)The Tale of Genji is the one of the most famous novel. And it is written in Archaic Japanese. It have translated into many languages. Therefore I cannot say definitely that Archaic Japanese don't be internationally understood. If Archaic Japanese don't be internationally understood, it is no good reason to reject the request. In Japan, Archaic Japanese is teached in junior high school and high school and so on. In addition, many kind of the books written in Archaic Japanese are saled in Japanese bookstore;accordingly many people will take part in the project.
(2)については、例えば源氏物語は古典日本語で書かれた代表的な作品であるが、これは多くの言語に翻訳されており、国際的に知られていないともいえない。仮に、古典日本語が国際的に知られていないとしても、古典日本語のウィキペディアの成立を拒む理由にならない。日本の中学校や高等学校などでは古文が教えられている。さらに、日本の書店では古文で書かれた多くの書籍(源氏物語や竹取物語など)が売られている。だから、多くの人の参加は見込める。-- 07:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)(rewriting)-- 02:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The project's extremely restrictive policy on the "purity" of the vocabulary is not feasible. Look at the current leading paragraph for "computer" on the test project:

A computer is a thing that works on a number to give out a number. It does one thing at a time. Some needs [sic] man's help every time to work. Some work from the beginning till the end by themselves without human. The word generally means both. Strictly the former [sic] is meant.

As you see, the explanation is too vague and provides almost no help in getting an idea what a computer is. This seems to be due to the unrealistic effort to exlude such words as "machine", "data", "operation", etc. altogether. Besides, they seem to even make up nonexistent words all over the place in order to (perhaps out of nationalism) exclude Chinese vocabulary, which I believe is beyond the purpose of an encyclopaedia.

Also, the overall (linguistic) quality of the articles is not nearly satisfactory. I understand that no Wikipedia article is a final version, but feel that at least some more attention should be paid to reduce the errors in the very basic grammar such as verb conjugation.

I don't mean to undermine the project by writing this, but I want them to cool off and think seriously to fix the problems. Bungo Wikipaedia looks much more realistic and well-organized in these respects, though newer and still smaller. They carefully set a framework to make things consistent, keep the standards high, and help the project grow cyclopaedic. I cannot support this Archaic Japanese Wikipaedia project (which is more challenging by nature) unless it makes significant efforts to improve the situation. --LQVX 00:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Agreed with LQVX, the test project on the incuvator seems reconstructed artificial language rather than natural language, and the articles seems to be contradict with its proclaimed end (purified Japanese based on 10thC Late Old Language). It is not the language spoken/writen in that age, but unsuccessful reconstruction. --Aphaia 08:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Archaic Japanese wikipedia is follow the example of the sentences written in Heian era and these sentences is mainly written with words peculiar to Japan. Therefore the Archaic Japanese wikipedia will mainly use words peculiar to Japan, too. It is not a project which result from nationalism, and I don't attempt to exclude words stem from acient Chinese(漢語) because these words were being used in the sentences written in Heian era, for example, gusoku(具足), goranzu(御覧ず), tyozu(調ず),kyo(興), but it is not as frequent as modern Japanese. And I will accept the use of words stem from Ancient Chinese, if there is the necessity of using it. If there are these words in Archaic Japanese sentences, it is not unnatural. -- 01:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is ojp ISO 639-3 for this language. I have just added it to the template.-- 03:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see no (active) test project.... --OosWesThoesBes 07:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is not true. The test project is here[3], and it is understood that the project is being edited by at least eight people according to the revision history of "Template:Wp/jpn-classical/Topics"[4].-- 05:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's why I couldn't find it: other code. It was edited. Take a look at recent changes. No wp/jpn-classical can be found in recent changes. The project is currently dead. --OosWesThoesBes 07:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General comments[edit]

このウィキペディアの名前についてですが、文語にはいろいろな文体があるので定義が明確ではないと思います。よってより定義を明確にするために「擬古文」という名称に変えたく思いますが、どうでしょうか。因みに「擬古文」とは平安時代の文体すなわち源氏物語などの文体を規範とする文章であり、漢文訓読体は含みません。-- 13:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Translation: "(machine translation, please proofread) Concerning the name of this Wikipedia, the definition is not clear because there are various written forms. For example, we might change 'Classical Japanese' to 'pseudo-archaic writings' in order to make definition clearer. 'Pseudo-archaic writings' are the composition which normally prints the style of the Heian era, namely the style of preindustrial civilization, and does not include the Chinese-writing Japanese-writing body."
賛成です。ただし提案全体を和文体(擬古文)のみに移してしまうのではなく、和文体と近代的文語に分けるのがよいのでは。それぞれにやりたい人がいるようですし、いずれも意義のあるプロジェクトですから。単に「文語体」と言ってしまうと後者をイメージするかたが多いでしょうから、「擬古文」の提案を新しく立ててはいかがでしょうか。その際には上のSupport理由は両方に持っていって差し支えないと思います。--楓山 03:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Translation: "(machine translation, please proofread) It is approved. However, the whole suggestion that the Japanese-character body (almost only archaic writings) will not change, the Japanese character body it is good because to divide into the modern written language. Respectively, it seems that the person who would like to do is because and, it is the project which in each case has meaning. When you simply call it the "written language body", the method which represents latter is more, because probably will be, raising the proposition of "pseudo archaic writings" newly, how, probably will be? At that time as for the Support reason above keeping having both, you think that it does not become inconvenient."
ところで、そうなると(近代的)文語体版の提案を新たに立てようかとも思うのですが、ただでさえ小さなコミュニティを二分してよいものかどうか、正直ちょっと踏み切れずにおります。両派の皆様はいかがお考えでしょうか。--楓山 07:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Translation: "(machine translation, please proofread) It is not approved because the nettle tree was the proposer, the shank. If the proposer so says, here should think that it became a proposal for a pseudo-archaic writings Wikipedia.
When it becomes so by the way, whether it will raise the proposal of a modern written-language Wikipedia anew as well, it is to think, but whether or not even the small community those which two minutes it is possible to do, honestly just a little step it is. Will everyone of both groups probably think how?
参考 -- 00:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Translation: "(machine translation, please proofread) Does the modern written language mean pointing to a concrete style? Normally, it probably means the style used in legal text before World War II and the like? Normally the sentence is, with government to norm to be the style which is converted, furthermore because vocabulary is also abundant, as for the reason which should deny you think that it is not. If you are were proposing the first one, I approve. Reference: [5]"
For the benefit of non-Japanese-readers, the above discussion revolves around whether to stay with a "Classical Japanese" Wikipedia proposal or to go with a "pseudo-Archaic Japanese Wikipedia," and also whether to propose another Wikipedia in "Modern Classical" Japanese, but there doesn't seem to be a consensus on what that means.
What I would like to say here is that all of this is splitting hairs. No, of course we wouldn't be writing in 100% Classical Japanese, since we'll be talking about computers and the Nobel Prize, two concepts unknown to Heian Period Japanese. However, if you look at other Wikipedias in dead languages, they don't have a problem with this. They use authentic (or as authentic as possible) grammar, morphology, syntax, etc., but with modern vocabulary where needed. In other words - just call it Classical Japanese, and there will be no problem. The only problem would be that 「擬古文版ウィキペディア」は名前としてちょっと変ではないですか。「ぎこちない文章」の略だよ、と言われそうでいやです、はっきりいって。ほかの古代語によるウィキペディアに見習って、現代人に知られている名前でいくべきではないかと思います。「Oh look here's a Wikipedia in Pseudo-Arch.. what?」という反応が目にみえて、ちょっと恥ずかしいです。Madler 05:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Madler-san, I agree that we should not dwell on splitting hairs; now is the time to bring the project into reality at all. However, the difference between Heian literary Japanese and Meiji written-style Japanese is just too big to call splitting hairs. I guess that neither party wants to see the two styles mixed up in an article. As for your criticism about 名称に関するご心配は当たらないと思います。「ぎこちない文章」の略であるという駄洒落のセンスには感服いたしましたが、名称として不適切である理由にはならないでしょう。また、私ども日本語話者には「擬古文」という呼び方は広く知られております。意図している文体をわかりやすく簡潔に言い表している点で、「擬古文版」は的確な名称であるように思います。
さて、Madlerさんのご指摘にも関連しますが「擬古文」の英語名称はどうしましょう。古い日本語全般ではなく擬古文調を表す定まった訳し方はあるのでしょうか。--楓山 15:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Archaic Japaneseはどうでしょうか。「ジーニアス英和大辞典」によるとarchaismには「擬古文」という意味があります。-- 00:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
上で話題にした文語版の提案ですが、やはり古文版の様子がもう少しはっきりするまで、しばらく私からは控えます。--楓山 14:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
古文版も軌道に乗ってきたようにお見受けしますので、文語版を提案させていただきました。よろしくお願いいたします。--楓山 20:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
これは、Classical Japanese でいいのでは。archaic は (1) old and no longer used, (2) very old-fashioned, (3) from a much earlier or ancient period of history ということで、「古い」ことが意味の中心です。対して classical は widely accepted and used for a long time ということで、古くからあり、ひとつの class として定着しているものということになります。下で、Taichi さんも指摘されているように、Archaic Japanese はむしろ奈良時代の言葉にふさわしいと思います。 -- Leque 03:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

やはり「擬古文」という名前は一般的に広く知られているとは言えませんし、専ら和語で記すウィキペディアの名称に漢語を使うのは腑に落ちないので、たびたび申し訳ありませんが、古文(いにしへぶみ)という名に変えたいと思います。-- 05:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

質問なのですが、日本語版の言語コードが「ja」なのですから、日本語の古文版の言語コードは「ja-classical」が適切ではありませんか?なぜ「jpn-classical」になっているのでしょうか。Enirac Sum 16:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Enirac Sum さんの感じ方は理解できます。一方で、申請の方針では、ISO 639-2 か ISO 639-3 draft を使うように定めています(ja は ISO-639-1での定義)。日本語はどちらでも jpn です。ご回答になれば幸いです。--Aphaia 18:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
なるほど、その方針は見ていませんでした。確かにそれに従えば「jpn-classical」にはなりますね。しかし、それでは漢文版の「zh-classical」やシベリア語版の「ru-sib」、現在提案中されている漢字で書いた朝鮮語版の「ko-hanja」などはどうなのでしょうか。これらはISO 639-2ではそれぞれ「chi-classical/zho-classical」、「rus-sib」、「kor-hanja」になるはずですよね。全く新しい言語ならともかく、「jpn」は明らかに既にウィキペディアがある日本語のことを指しているのですから、やはり同一の言語には同一のコードを当てるべきなのではないでしょうか?Enirac Sum 23:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Enirac Sum さんは説得する相手を間違えているように思います。わたくしから申し上げることは以上です。--Aphaia 08:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
私は逆に「いにしへぶみ」という言葉をここで初めて知りました。Google で検索してみても、それほど広く知られている言葉とは思えません。擬古文ないし和文の方がまだ耳慣れた言葉だと思います。また、手許の古語辞典をひもといてみると「いにしへぶみ: 昔の書物。古典。」とあり、漢文なども含む意味にもとれます。和語で言うのなら、樋口一葉は、「別れ霜」で「伊勢源氏などのなつかしきやまと文」というような表現をしています(ただし「やまとぶみ」は日本書紀の異称でもあるようですが。ja:日本書紀)。 Leque 02:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
仰るとおりです。確かに「古文」と書いてイニシヘブミと読むのは強引で一般的でもないので、これをそのまま字音でコブンと読むのはどうでしょうか。学校の国語では古文の名で、源氏物語や竹取物語を学んでいるので、一般的な名といえるのでないでしょうか。-- 05:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
そうですね、一般に知られている言葉とするとそのあたりになるでしょうか。私は擬古文や和文というのもそれほど悪くないと思いますが(漢語になってしまうのはやはりちょっと残念ですけれど)。「やまとぶみ」については、もう少し調べてみると、江戸時代の往来物には「三井親和大和文」(みついしんなやまとぶみ)というのがあり、また、広辞苑には和文の意味で挙がっているのに対し、岩波古語辞典では、「いろは字」、「春のみやまぢ」などを引いて日本書紀の意味としていました。どちらが一般的だったのかはよくわかりません。 -- Leque 13:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
たびたびすいません。しばらく考えて、「古文」という名前は不適切だと思うようになりました。「古文」というのはあくまで昔に書かれたものを指すのであって、擬古文のことを言うのではありません。全体に、このプロジェクトの提案では Archaic Japanese (または Late Old Japanese 。平安時代ごろの日本の口語そのもの)と Classical Japanese (和文体、雅文体、擬古文体。源氏物語的な文体。平安時代の口語→江戸時代の擬古文→明治期の和文という流れ)がきちんと区別されていないように思います。
Excuse me, but now I think 古文 is a wrong name. 古文 means old archaic (and often classical) writings, and does not equal to 擬古文(, 和文, or 雅文); 擬古文 is ones modeling after 古文, especially in the Heian Era. We should make a distinction between Archaic Japanese (or Late Old Japanese) and Classical Japanese. -- Leque 00:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
返事が大変遅くなってしまい、申し訳ありません。文体名のことですね。こういう議論はテストプロジェクトの議論のページで行うほうがよいと思うので、その場を設けました。ご参照下さい。[6] -- 03:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
また、「古人の求めたところを知る」というのはウィキペディアの本質とはかけ離れたことだと思います。ウィキペディアが記すべきことは古人の求めたことではなく、今の時代に生きる人々が求める知識などではないでしょうか。ですから、古文版ウィキペディアが目指すべきところは、あくまで平安時代の和文のような文体を用い、古今東西の物事を記すという一点に尽きると思います。-- 07:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
すみません。おっしゃる通りです。自分で何を言いたいのかうまく整理できていませんでした。上の文は、テスト運用中のページを見ていて、古めかしく書くことにこだわりすぎて表現がぎこちなくなっている部分もあるような気がしたので、例えば文語版のように、特定の時代にこだわらず、いくらか現代風にアレンジした和文体とする、といったような方向性もあるのではないか、というようなことを言いたかったのだと思います。 Leque 11:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
テストウィキで記事を書き、議論を重ねていくうちに、どのような文体とすべきかは自ずと決まってくると思います。-- 03:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Language Code Issue 2[edit]

Is this the same as Old Japanese, which has the ISO 639-3 code ojp? Jon Harald Søby 23:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

en:Old Japanese suggests they are not identical, but I am not sure. I asked if they are same on its talk. --Aphaia 01:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Through the discussion on talk, I am inclining to the opinion it may not be the same. I would rather say the ISO fails to register the historical ancestors properly. --Aphaia 10:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suggest that is better a short code, maybe ja-old, for pairing the ja code for japanese. --Taichi - (あ!) 07:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's not good idea. Because old is "Mochi Language" in ISO 639-3. If you want to make new code for this wikipedia, you should consider that every 2 or 3 character words has possibility to be ISO 639 language code, and every 4 words has possibility to be ISO 15924 script code. --Masoris 19:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

却下? / Rejection?[edit]

Talk:Language subcommittee#New projects in historical languageをみて、おやとおもい pathoschildさん、Shanelさんにお尋ねしたのですが、新規の歴史的言語(historical language)のプロジェクト申請については一律に却下するよう、方針を最近改めたそうです。Meta:Language proposal policyにはこうありました。

The proposal has a sufficient number of living native speakers to form a viable community and audience. If the proposal is for an artificial language such as Esperanto, it must have a reasonable degree of recognition as determined by discussion.

Pathoschild さんの個人的な意見としては、Wikiaなどにコンテンツを移して継続すればこれまでの営為が無駄にならずにすむのではないかということでした。LangComの方針としては、しかし却下ということです。

残念なお知らせで申し訳ないです。Pathoschildさんによれば、現在新方針に基づく依頼の許可/却下の通知を進めているということですので、そう遠くない将来、LangComのメンバーから正式な通知があると思います。--Aphaia 02:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.