Tag Alias: utawarerumono -> utawareru_mono

葉月 said:
うたわれるもの has a very unclear meaning at best, has been always written in kana, and there are almost all other *monos written together going against splitting it. Saying it's somehow correct when it hardly has any discernible meaning is a big stretch, and going against everyone else for no good reason is just silly. Sure, correctness over popularity, but let's not make up cases where we're different just to fuck with people.

I don't see what's so incredibly obscure about its meaning (and saying that it hardly has any discernible meaning is really pushing the boundaries of silly imo) and nor do I see how this impacts where spaces go in the romanization.

What I am beginning to see, though, is that I was mistaken when I assumed that the majority of people would split a verb followed by "mono". It just seems a lot neater to me, and writing it as one word looks as messy to me as writing "the purring cat" as "the purringcat". Clearly I am alone in this view, though.

If the majority wants utawarerumono, then that's what the majority shall have.

Since the technicalities of the grammar are over my head (and don't seem to have obvious/well established rules here like we do for romanization), and the majority of Japanese-inclined users are on the side of keeping it together, and because I've never seen it written any other way, I'll leave it as is. If there were significant support from multiple other translators for separating it, I might, but that's not the case here it seems.

Well, actually, I'd support Soljashy here. This topic is barely 18 hours old, jxh2154 - I don't think you can really claim that a consensus has been built.

忘れ物 has not "evolved from 忘れるもの". As it is formed with the stem of the verb, it has an entirely different meaning from the compound formed with the entire verb. 忘れるもの is a phrase composed of the head noun もの described by an attributive relative clause, 忘れる. 忘れるもの is "that which forgets". 忘れ物 is a verb-noun compound word, not a multi-word phrase. Its meaning is not set by any rules of syntax, but is just developed naturally in its specific case - in this case, it means "something that was forgotten". In other such compounds, like 流れ者, the compounding process forms in an almost inverted way, since 流れ者 means "drifter" (~vagabond).

うたわれるもの is very likely supposed to mean 謳われる者, but even if not, it is clear that うたわれる is a verb (probably passive construction of a verb written うたう), and that it is forming a relative clause modifying the noun もの.

Considering うたわれもの and うたわれるもの to be at all comparable grammatically is a mistake. うたわれもの, if attested, would be a single word, and うたわれるもの would be two words forming a phrase. Note that this conclusion is totally independent of the actual meaning of the words - it is wholly the result of syntactic, not semantic, analysis.

So Soljashy is totally correct, objectively. Of course, it's another matter if we want to drag the other 99% of danbooru kicking and screaming into calling things the way they should be called rather than the way that the vaunted "English-speaking anime community" tends to call them. Again, I'm all for this suggestion, but I don't want to get yelled and screamed at like back when I suggested ookami to koushinryou, either. So there's that.

EDIT: To those over whose heads the technicalities of grammar have been flying, I would like to mention that pretty much all "grammatical evidence" mentioned earlier in this thread has been rather vague and unsuitable (imo) as the basis of any kind of policy. Soljashy, whether something is a "single concept" or not is immaterial, not to mention very difficult to define properly.

richie's speculation about passive verbs + nouns and supposed etymology is nonsense. Ancient feeling of the title? What? I would like to suggest that you learn Japanese a bit more before attempting to invoke grammar that you don't understand. Nothing personal.

0xCCBA696 said:
ookami to koushinryou

I knew something about this discussion seemed familiar to me.

Just so I'm 100% clear here, an alias has virtually no impact on how people actually use the site, right? Tag searches for utawarerumono will still return all the results for utawareru_mono, people can tag new pictures with either and the alias will automatically correct them, and existing pictures don't have to be manually retagged? Because if this is the case, not making the change because it'll throw people off doesn't really seem like a sensible reason.

That said, I had never really thought about this before because 'utawarerumono' doesn't bother me visually, but 'utawareru_mono' seems so obviously correct (for the reasons laid forth by 0xCCBA696) that I was genuinely surprised to see people arguing against it. I would no sooner romanize 謳われる者 as one word than I would 謳われる人.

Yes. Everything you said about aliases is correct.

To be fair, forum #20474 was more about naming policy on danbooru than anything actually about Japanese. I just brought it up because much the same type of arguments (against) seem to be showing up in this thread that appeared in that one.

Perhaps people are confused because うたわれる is rather short for a clause. Here's a bit from SPACE-ALC's corpus:

そこで、大統領の心は、他の責務へと動き始めていたものと思われます。テロ攻撃の結果として出現した衝撃、つまり脅威に対処するための責務に。

I would romanize this as "soko de, daitouryou no kokoro wa, hoka no sekimu e to ugokihajimeteita mono to omowaremasu. tero kougeki no kekka to shite shutsugen shita shougeki, tsumari kyoui ni taisho suru tame no sekimu ni." Well, actually I'd use 日本式, but the above is using danbooru's standard romanization scheme. Spacing is not standardized on danbooru, afaik, but the above makes the most sense to me, syntactically speaking.

So why is this relevant? Here we have a similar construction: a noun phrase composed of the head noun "もの" modified by an attributive relative clause, in this case "他の責務へと動き始めていた". It would be totally nonsensical to space this as "hoka no sekimu e to ugokihajimeteitamono". It would be even more nonsensical to space this as "hokanosekimuetougokihajimeteitamono".

0xCCBA696 said:
Soljashy, whether something is a "single concept" or not is immaterial, not to mention very difficult to define properly.

Actually, I was trying to make this very distinction:

忘れるもの is a phrase composed of the head noun もの described by an attributive relative clause, 忘れる. 忘れるもの is "that which forgets". 忘れ物 is a verb-noun compound word, not a multi-word phrase.

Only in my case I couldn't find the proper terms. I'm an Afrikaner for Piet's sake. But thanks for stating the argument properly.

0xCCBA696 said:
richie's speculation about passive verbs + nouns and supposed etymology is nonsense. Ancient feeling of the title? What? I would like to suggest that you learn Japanese a bit more before attempting to invoke grammar that you don't understand. Nothing personal.

Ah, please forgive this common sense of mine, which tells me that when something can be said in Japanese easier and shorter but it's not - then I should get that archaic feeling (or, in other cases, the feeling of extra politeness)

I rest my case. I could probably search and find many other inconsistences to counter the argument about this compound word - multi word distinction (and how they are/should be correctly romanized) but I'm apparently too lazy for that.

Way to not read anything I said. うたわれるもの can't "be said in Japanese easier and shorter". Lern2grammarplz

And go look up what "I rest my case" means - it's not what you apparently think... :/

0xCCBA696 said:
Way to not read anything I said. うたわれるもの can't "be said in Japanese easier and shorter". Lern2grammarplz

If you only read my earlier post carefully you'd notice I was only considering that possibility, because I wasn't sure if there exist something shorter.

And go look up what "I rest my case" means - it's not what you apparently think... :/

Treat it literally, not (as usual) ironic.

Literally, it means that you have finished laying out all your points, and that your argument is complete. Here it seems like you're saying that although your argument is incomplete, you are ceasing to argue.

As for shortened forms, I took "please forgive this common sense of mine" to be a sarcasm indicator. Sorry if I was wrong.