_o_ or _wo_

Qcumber
Posts: 245
Joined: 2005-05-01, 21:57
Location: Europe

_o_ or _wo_

Postby Qcumber » 2005-06-04, 22:39

I think that conventionally the object particle that is pronounced [o] is transliterated as _wo_.
At least, all the books I have do this.

Yakú ni tatánu monó wo kawa-nái hô ga íi.
/usage / [place] / not stand / thing / [object] / buy-not / direction / [subject] / good /
"One shouldnt buy useless things."
(Vaccari 1969:431)

User avatar
Psi-Lord
Posts: 10087
Joined: 2002-08-18, 7:02
Real Name: Marcel Q.
Gender: male
Location: Cândido Mota
Country: BR Brazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Postby Psi-Lord » 2005-06-04, 22:55

Yes. The postposition o is spelt wo, the postposition e is spelt he, and the postposition wa is spelt ha.

お⇒を
え⇒へ
わ⇒は
português do Brasil (pt-BR)British English (en-GB) galego (gl) português (pt) •• العربية (ar) български (bg) Cymraeg (cy) Deutsch (de)  r n km.t (egy) español rioplatense (es-AR) 日本語 (ja) 한국어 (ko) lingua Latina (la) ••• Esperanto (eo) (grc) français (fr) (hi) magyar (hu) italiano (it) polski (pl) Türkçe (tr) 普通話 (zh-CN)

Omoidebanashi
Posts: 12
Joined: 2005-06-25, 7:45
Real Name: Joshua Baker
Gender: male
Location: Wellington
Country: NZ New Zealand (New Zealand / Aotearoa)

Postby Omoidebanashi » 2005-06-26, 4:14

Don't write "ha" or "he" for those particles in roomaji, though, because you'll look silly.

User avatar
Rounin
Posts: 761
Joined: 2004-01-13, 12:31
Gender: female

Postby Rounin » 2005-06-26, 14:41

Do the opposite of what the previous poster said.

User avatar
schalke81
Posts: 176
Joined: 2002-09-06, 16:51
Gender: female
Location: osaka, nihon

Postby schalke81 » 2005-06-26, 14:54

to be honest, i disagree rouin...

i think it is better to write..

`nihon e ikimasu` instead of `nihon he ikimasu`
and
`watashi no namae wa...desu` is better than `watashi no namae ha...desu`

but, that s just personal opinion!

User avatar
Psi-Lord
Posts: 10087
Joined: 2002-08-18, 7:02
Real Name: Marcel Q.
Gender: male
Location: Cândido Mota
Country: BR Brazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Postby Psi-Lord » 2005-06-26, 15:26

I personally think that one can do whatever he wants to—I never take romanisations that seriously. ;) And then, there'll be the differences between transcription and transliteration to follow… Even if we're to stick to what is / was commonly used, Nihon-shiki uses ha, he and wo, while Hepburn uses wa, e and o for the postpositions—at least that's so if my memory serves me right (and if the Wikipedia articles regarding them are to be trusted). And then there's Kunrei-shiki, JSL, Wāpuro…
português do Brasil (pt-BR)British English (en-GB) galego (gl) português (pt) •• العربية (ar) български (bg) Cymraeg (cy) Deutsch (de)  r n km.t (egy) español rioplatense (es-AR) 日本語 (ja) 한국어 (ko) lingua Latina (la) ••• Esperanto (eo) (grc) français (fr) (hi) magyar (hu) italiano (it) polski (pl) Türkçe (tr) 普通話 (zh-CN)

User avatar
Gormur
Posts: 7548
Joined: 2005-05-17, 1:11
Real Name: Gormur
Gender: male
Country: CU Cuba (Cuba)
Contact:

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Gormur » 2005-08-14, 6:36

Qcumber wrote:I think that conventionally the object particle that is pronounced [o] is transliterated as _wo_.
At least, all the books I have do this.

Yakú ni tatánu monó wo kawa-nái hô ga íi.
/usage / [place] / not stand / thing / [object] / buy-not / direction / [subject] / good /
"One shouldnt buy useless things."
(Vaccari 1969:431)


My Japanese tutor says 'wo' is an older pronunciation for the 'o' particle. I guess it's a fairly recent change because she herself uses 'wo' and is quite young.

User avatar
Kirk
Posts: 2607
Joined: 2005-05-26, 19:43
Real Name: Kirk
Gender: male
Location: Los Angeles
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Kirk » 2005-08-14, 6:47

Gormur wrote:
Qcumber wrote:I think that conventionally the object particle that is pronounced [o] is transliterated as _wo_.
At least, all the books I have do this.

Yakú ni tatánu monó wo kawa-nái hô ga íi.
/usage / [place] / not stand / thing / [object] / buy-not / direction / [subject] / good /
"One shouldnt buy useless things."
(Vaccari 1969:431)


My Japanese tutor says 'wo' is an older pronunciation for the 'o' particle. I guess it's a fairly recent change because she herself uses 'wo' and is quite young.


It could also survive in different dialects, even if it's disappeared in whatever is considered "standard" Japanese.
Image
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

I eat prescriptivists for breakfast.

maɪ nemz kʰɜ˞kʰ n̩ aɪ laɪk̚ fɨˈnɛ̞ɾɪ̞ks

User avatar
Gormur
Posts: 7548
Joined: 2005-05-17, 1:11
Real Name: Gormur
Gender: male
Country: CU Cuba (Cuba)
Contact:

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Gormur » 2005-08-15, 1:48

svenska84 wrote:
Gormur wrote:
Qcumber wrote:I think that conventionally the object particle that is pronounced [o] is transliterated as _wo_.
At least, all the books I have do this.

Yakú ni tatánu monó wo kawa-nái hô ga íi.
/usage / [place] / not stand / thing / [object] / buy-not / direction / [subject] / good /
"One shouldnt buy useless things."
(Vaccari 1969:431)


My Japanese tutor says 'wo' is an older pronunciation for the 'o' particle. I guess it's a fairly recent change because she herself uses 'wo' and is quite young.


It could also survive in different dialects, even if it's disappeared in whatever is considered "standard" Japanese.


Perhaps, but she said it is taught as the sound "o" now instead of "wo", so in that sense, it is "standard". How people speak is totally different, I agree, though I don't know anyone under 30 who uses "wo", and I know Japanese from Hokkaido down to Kyushu and everywhere in between. :wink:

User avatar
Kirk
Posts: 2607
Joined: 2005-05-26, 19:43
Real Name: Kirk
Gender: male
Location: Los Angeles
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Kirk » 2005-08-15, 2:29

Gormur wrote:
svenska84 wrote:
Gormur wrote:
Qcumber wrote:I think that conventionally the object particle that is pronounced [o] is transliterated as _wo_.
At least, all the books I have do this.

Yakú ni tatánu monó wo kawa-nái hô ga íi.
/usage / [place] / not stand / thing / [object] / buy-not / direction / [subject] / good /
"One shouldnt buy useless things."
(Vaccari 1969:431)


My Japanese tutor says 'wo' is an older pronunciation for the 'o' particle. I guess it's a fairly recent change because she herself uses 'wo' and is quite young.


It could also survive in different dialects, even if it's disappeared in whatever is considered "standard" Japanese.


Perhaps, but she said it is taught as the sound "o" now instead of "wo", so in that sense, it is "standard". How people speak is totally different, I agree, though I don't know anyone under 30 who uses "wo", and I know Japanese from Hokkaido down to Kyushu and everywhere in between. :wink:


Oh yeah, it's definitely taught as /o/, so I guess that fits in with how Standard Japanese is taught. I also see it Romanized as "o."

Random site note about Japanese Romanization--is there an official set of rules for Romanization used by the Japanese government? The reason I ask is that there are several different ways of Romanizing Korean but the (South) Korean government has established the official Romanization standard, and it's pretty widely used and understood. I'm just curious as to if any form of Japanese Romanization enjoys such official governmental endorsement as does Korean's official system.

Romanization can be a tricky thing, especially when various forms are competing. The current official Romanization was adopted by S. Korea in 2000, so some place names on maps may be listed in differing ways since it's pretty new.

To show the craziness of the different sets of Romanization, I'll Romanize the following words which are in IPA: [sɔul] [tʃedʒu] [[b̬jɔ] [wɔ] [pʰada] [poda]:

Official (2000-): Seoul, Jeju, ppyeo, wo, pada, boda

Official (1959-2000): Seoul, Jeju, bbyeo, weo, pada, boda

Yale: Sewul, Ceycwu, ppye, we, phata, pota

McCune-Reischauer: Sŏul, Cheju, ppyŏ, wŏ, p'ada, poda
Image
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

I eat prescriptivists for breakfast.

maɪ nemz kʰɜ˞kʰ n̩ aɪ laɪk̚ fɨˈnɛ̞ɾɪ̞ks

User avatar
Psi-Lord
Posts: 10087
Joined: 2002-08-18, 7:02
Real Name: Marcel Q.
Gender: male
Location: Cândido Mota
Country: BR Brazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Psi-Lord » 2005-08-15, 2:41

svenska84 wrote:Random site note about Japanese Romanization--is there an official set of rules for Romanization used by the Japanese government?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romaji
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepburn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon-shiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunrei-shiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wapuro_romaji
português do Brasil (pt-BR)British English (en-GB) galego (gl) português (pt) •• العربية (ar) български (bg) Cymraeg (cy) Deutsch (de)  r n km.t (egy) español rioplatense (es-AR) 日本語 (ja) 한국어 (ko) lingua Latina (la) ••• Esperanto (eo) (grc) français (fr) (hi) magyar (hu) italiano (it) polski (pl) Türkçe (tr) 普通話 (zh-CN)

Qcumber
Posts: 245
Joined: 2005-05-01, 21:57
Location: Europe

wo or o

Postby Qcumber » 2005-08-15, 10:38

Some of you, including the teacher mentioned, do not seem to realize that wo is a mere transliteration, definitely not a phonemic or phonetic transcription.

Some authors use o instead of wo, but the best ones are consistent: they supply a phonemic transcription. For example 春 を 待つ。is transcribed as Háru o mátu. « [ ] expects spring. » by Samuel E. MARTIN (A reference grammar of Japanese, 1988, 2004 :187)

The same sentence would be transliterated as Haru wo matsu. By other authors.

User avatar
Psi-Lord
Posts: 10087
Joined: 2002-08-18, 7:02
Real Name: Marcel Q.
Gender: male
Location: Cândido Mota
Country: BR Brazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Postby Psi-Lord » 2005-08-15, 11:44

Shinji Takasugi, in his Teach Yourself Japanese, does mention that, although the standard has gone from [wo] to [o] when it comes to the accusative marker, some people still pronounce it as [wo], though he gives no details about it being dialectal or anything. [we] and [wi] have changed into [e] and [i] such a long time ago, though, that ゑ and ゐ were definitely dropped out.

Edit: I've seen some sources that mention [wi] being directly simplified to [i], while [we] would have been simplified to [je] first, and then to [e]. That seems to have happened somewhere around the 10th–11th centuries.
português do Brasil (pt-BR)British English (en-GB) galego (gl) português (pt) •• العربية (ar) български (bg) Cymraeg (cy) Deutsch (de)  r n km.t (egy) español rioplatense (es-AR) 日本語 (ja) 한국어 (ko) lingua Latina (la) ••• Esperanto (eo) (grc) français (fr) (hi) magyar (hu) italiano (it) polski (pl) Türkçe (tr) 普通話 (zh-CN)

User avatar
Kirk
Posts: 2607
Joined: 2005-05-26, 19:43
Real Name: Kirk
Gender: male
Location: Los Angeles
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Kirk » 2005-08-15, 22:07

Psi-Lord wrote:
svenska84 wrote:Random site note about Japanese Romanization--is there an official set of rules for Romanization used by the Japanese government?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romaji
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepburn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon-shiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunrei-shiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wapuro_romaji


Thanks for the links! :)

Psi-Lord wrote:Shinji Takasugi, in his Teach Yourself Japanese, does mention that, although the standard has gone from [wo] to [o] when it comes to the accusative marker, some people still pronounce it as [wo], though he gives no details about it being dialectal or anything. [we] and [wi] have changed into [e] and [i] such a long time ago, though, that ゑ and ゐ were definitely dropped out.

Edit: I've seen some sources that mention [wi] being directly simplified to [i], while [we] would have been simplified to [je] first, and then to [e]. That seems to have happened somewhere around the 10th–11th centuries.


Oh, interesting--is that the locative particle [e] you're talking about?
Image
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

I eat prescriptivists for breakfast.

maɪ nemz kʰɜ˞kʰ n̩ aɪ laɪk̚ fɨˈnɛ̞ɾɪ̞ks

User avatar
Psi-Lord
Posts: 10087
Joined: 2002-08-18, 7:02
Real Name: Marcel Q.
Gender: male
Location: Cândido Mota
Country: BR Brazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Psi-Lord » 2005-08-15, 22:46

svenska84 wrote:Oh, interesting--is that the locative particle [e] you're talking about?

No. The [e] particle comes from [he] (and is still spelt へ he instead of え e). The [wa] particle, incidentally, also comes from [ha] (and is still spelt は ha instead of わ wa). Historically, though, the process was about the same—older [h] became [w] in the middle of words, and later this [w] was dropped except when it appeared before [a]. Since postpositions are closely linked to the word they follow, they were treated like being in the middle of words. The postposition [o] was probably caught in the [w]-dropping wave, though it didn't derive from an earlier [ho].

Pre World War spelling was very etymological and still showed signs of these changes, even if the pronunciation had actually changed centuries ago. かわ kawa 'river', for instance, was spelt かは kaha; こい koi 'love' was spelt こひ kohi; おかし okashi 'sweet' was spelt をかし wokashi; いど ido 'well' was spelt ゐど wido; and so on.
português do Brasil (pt-BR)British English (en-GB) galego (gl) português (pt) •• العربية (ar) български (bg) Cymraeg (cy) Deutsch (de)  r n km.t (egy) español rioplatense (es-AR) 日本語 (ja) 한국어 (ko) lingua Latina (la) ••• Esperanto (eo) (grc) français (fr) (hi) magyar (hu) italiano (it) polski (pl) Türkçe (tr) 普通話 (zh-CN)

User avatar
Kirk
Posts: 2607
Joined: 2005-05-26, 19:43
Real Name: Kirk
Gender: male
Location: Los Angeles
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: _o_ or _wo_

Postby Kirk » 2005-08-15, 23:45

Psi-Lord wrote:
svenska84 wrote:Oh, interesting--is that the locative particle [e] you're talking about?

No. The [e] particle comes from [he] (and is still spelt へ he instead of え e). The [wa] particle, incidentally, also comes from [ha] (and is still spelt は ha instead of わ wa). Historically, though, the process was about the same—older [h] became [w] in the middle of words, and later this [w] was dropped except when it appeared before [a]. Since postpositions are closely linked to the word they follow, they were treated like being in the middle of words. The postposition [o] was probably caught in the [w]-dropping wave, though it didn't derive from an earlier [ho].


Interesting! Sounds like a typical case of sandhi reanalysis to me.

Psi-Lord wrote:Pre World War spelling was very etymological and still showed signs of these changes, even if the pronunciation had actually changed centuries ago. かわ kawa 'river', for instance, was spelt かは kaha; こい koi 'love' was spelt こひ kohi; おかし okashi 'sweet' was spelt をかし wokashi; いど ido 'well' was spelt ゐど wido; and so on.


Cool--historical developments in Japanese are pretty interesting.
Image
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

I eat prescriptivists for breakfast.

maɪ nemz kʰɜ˞kʰ n̩ aɪ laɪk̚ fɨˈnɛ̞ɾɪ̞ks


Return to “Japanese (日本語)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest