Open JMdictProject opened 1 year ago
robinjmdict
commented
1 year ago I think a phonetics tag could be useful. GG5 only has a handful of【音】entries but I suspect that most phonetics terms are tagged as【言】.
~200 [ling] entries were retagged as [gramm] with a bulk update last year (see #51). Some more were changed by hand. I'm sure there are quite a few others which should be [gramm], but given that there are nearly 600 ling-tagged entries, working through the list would be quite a task.
JMdictProject
commented
1 year ago OK. I'll add [phon] or something like that next update.
briankrznarich
commented
8 months ago I ran into this from #123 (where I coincidentally made the same observation about ling/gramm).
It looks like [phon] was never added. I started skimming through the 600 [ling] terms to gauge what might need to be moved to [gramm]. Actually, it looks like maybe even 1/3rd (or more) of the terms could cleanly move to [gramm]. (So, indeed, it's work for everyone involved). Looking at the first few pages, as many as 1 in 5 terms are fairly obviously [phon]. (On the 3rd paged of results, as a sample, I tallied 23 of 100 terms offhand). That's ~100+ terms for [phon] if created.
Really, a few of the traditional subdomains of linguistics could afford categories (lots of jargon). Syntax, semantics, morphology, pragmatics, etc.
I have the technical background to read through 600 [ling] entries and shuffle them around fairly efficiently if there's any interest. Not saying I'm pushing for it, and it would still take some calendar time. And there are some ambiguous cases that I would need to ask about.
If not interested, pay this no mind ; )
In the new シュワー entry, which has been given the [ling] field tag, someone has suggested we have a tag for phonetics as well. I see GG5 has tags of 【言】, 【文法】 and 【言】 (e.g. on 類音), so it may be worth considering. While we are at it, the use of the [ling] and [gramm] tags seems a bit haphazard. Quite a few of the ling-tagged entries probably should be changed to [gramm].