When shounen is no longer "shounen" anymore...

[DonQuigleone]

If I could change how people use words, I think this would be the best solution:

1. Have the Shonen Genre labelled "Battle manga". When people refer to Shonen as a genre, they always use it to refer to manga that surrounds battling (even if those battles involve something non-violent like cooking...). It is certainly a distinct enough genre to merit a label. It shouldn't be shoehorned into "action", as action can mean a lot of other things.

2. Relabel Shonen, Shojo, Seinen and Josei to their English equivalents, IE Boys, Girls, Young Men and Young Women. There's no reason that we have to use these japanese terms when perfectly serviceable english equivalents exist.

3. When it comes to labelling manga genres, take the lead from the Japanese manga community. Find a Japanese equivalent of ANN, or Baka-updates (they must exist...) and copy their definitions, and their genres, albeit english translations. Keep loanwords to a minimum (for instance, I doubt you can easily find an english term that quite corresponds to Yaoi).

Unfortunately, this is a matter of an entire community, and it's very hard for us to pass a rule and change people's usage. People will use what makes most sense to them. The best we can do is educate, EG make all those Naruto Fans aware that Shonen includes a lot more then ninjas beating each other up, etc.

[Malkuth]

A minor detail, but shojo (処女) means virgin, not girl... that would be shoujo or shōjo (少女). Also shonen (初年) is an adverb refering to the first few years of an era. It's shounen or shōnen (少年) for boys

Yaoi is literally an abreviation for boring, pointless, and other stuff that I can not remember, but translating it as male homo-sexual-ity/-s covers clearly what it implies... always IMHO

[Qilin]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Two of the three principles I listed tend to occur naturally, in my experience.

Really think about the 2nd and 3rd principles I listed. Don't they tend to occur organically, without much need for any dictionary or thesaurus to push them forward?

The 3rd Principle ("Language should evolve to account for genuinely brand new things that we didn't have before") tends to occur through sheer necessity. The main blockage to this may be purists who are attached to a particular meaning of a word even after it's become much less functional than newer alternatives. But these purists won't stand up to word change if there's good, practical reason for the word change. Hence, why "Fantasy" now tends to carry with it the implied meaning of Tolkien-style Fantasy.

The 2nd Principle ("Language should evolve so that words that almost nobody uses any more are either updated with new meanings, or are allowed to fall into the mists of history and historical works") also tends to occur naturally. If certain words are rarely used any more, they usually either end up getting revived by an updated meaning, or they do in fact fall into the mists of history (at least as far as everyday conversation is concerned - Academia can be an exception here).

The third principle you mentioned is most likely natural, as you said. Meaningful representations are a natural consequence to new concepts and ideas.

The second principle you mentioned is one I'm less inclined to agree with. Because word meanings evolve even if the words have yet to meet obscurity. You see it all the time. You have a word belonging to a larger group, then a smaller group takes that same word and changes the meaning to adapt to their context. Now, if the rule you laid out was limited to a single context, then it would work out.

If the first one is verified by popular opinion, then we just go back to large numbers (popularity) as being what determines term usage.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

More efficient language = More efficient communication

Less efficient language = Less efficient communication

More efficient communication = Good for the world.

Less efficient communication = Bad for the world.

Now, does anybody seriously disagree with those four equations above? I dare say that they're more objective truth than subjective opinion.

Oh, yes. I agree completely.

However, I'm more concerned with this equation:

Lack of unity in shared representations within the community = Less efficient communication

As such, I say that simply adhering to popular usage is a better move.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Well, when popularity goes up against what's objectively better for language use, I'll go with what's objectively better.

You should be careful when throwing around words like "objective" in your arguments. I do agree that efficiency is a good thing, but don't confuse it for something "objective". It's only "good" because a lot of people agree with it in the first place.

For example, unity of representations takes a higher priority over precision of meaning from my perspective, but I don't at all claim it to be "objective".

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Popularity doesn't make something right. That being said, if the only reason people didn't want "Shounen" to turn into a genre label was some sort of nostalgic attachment to "Shounen" as a demographic indicator, then I'd probably agree with you on "Shounen". But that's not what's happening on this thread.

Vexx, Tempester, totoum, Malkuth, and others have all elaborated on practical problems that "shounen" shifting to a genre label understanding would cause. Totoum even gave a clear-cut example of a real problem that's already occurred.

But popularity is the only objective measuring stick we have without descending into subjective standards of how language "should be". Can you honestly say that your standards would be shared by everyone?

Originally Posted by Triple_R

So what will happen is either...

1) The anime fan community becomes better-informed on the demographic meaning of shounen, and over time and the effort of people to correct the misuse of the term, the anime fan community all eventually get on the same page with that demographic meaning, or...

2) The anime fan community doesn't become better-informed on the demographic meaning of shounen and/or insists on using it as a genre label in any event, which will create divisions within the anime community (primarily Japanese vs. non-Japanese) and will create loads of confusion (even at the local manga store, where all of a sudden K-On! and Azumanga Daioh! are now declared to be Shoujo, which by the way would help create a general public perception that these titles must be for girls; is that really a message you want the general public to be receiving on these titles?).


Given these two options, I strongly prefer the first one.

What is ideal, from my perspective, is for everyone to be aware of both usages of the term while being able to determine which one is used in a particular context. I am strongly for raising awareness of the original usage, but I am against "correcting" anyone who uses it as a genre.

Another assumption here is that there isn't already a sharp division within the anime community between the Japanese fans and English-speaking fans. As far as I know, there is very little homogeneity between the two groups. So once again, I ask why we should reconfigure our language use to cater to a group we hardly interact with?

And obviously, if you happen to communicate with a person from that other group, it's only natural that you should be aware of how they use their terms. For example, you don't speak straight English when you talk to a local in Japan. It's the same thing. No miscommunication will occur if you know how to discern what is appropriate according to context.

(even at the local manga store, where all of a sudden K-On! and Azumanga Daioh! are now declared to be Shoujo, which by the way would help create a general public perception that these titles must be for girls; is that really a message you want the general public to be receiving on these titles?).

Why in the world would those titles become labelled as "shoujo" when it is neither the right genre nor the right demographic for the two titles you mentioned?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Qilin

Why in the world would those titles become labelled as "shoujo" when it is neither the right genre nor the right demographic for the two titles you mentioned?

Exactly because the definition of shounen has been reduced incorrectly to a subset (the action battle subset) - instead either of "titles for boys" or "action battle stories". That leaves the entirety of the rest of shounen adrift to be mislabeled by people who are misusing the word "shounen". If the only "pie" I know is apple pie and I encounter a peach pie, I'm going to put it over in some other category in some arm-waving manner as those store employees did.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Malkuth

A minor detail, but shojo (処女) means virgin, not girl... that would be shoujo or shōjo (少女). Also shonen (初年) is an adverb refering to the first few years of an era. It's shounen or shōnen (少年) for boys

Except that in english shonen and shojo are loanwords, and it is considered correct to use either the o or ou variation (while english doesn't have accents). All 3 are correct renderings.

That's why we write Tokyo, and not Tōkyō or Toukyou.

According to wikipedia, all 3 count for shonen, and the same goes for shojo

[Malkuth]

... and that's an excellent way to confuse more people... especially the shojo/shoujo, until I hit the kanji in a manga I realized how many times I had misinterpreted it.

Anyway, wikipedia aside (which is not always correct), the two above are the commonly accepted transliteration systems for long vowels in japanese. Now of course people unfamiliar with the language, culture, etc. are free to do as they please, but that does not change the fact that they are confusing others, which was the point of the discussion (in the last few pages at least)

PS: and indeed, I am writing toukyou for my auto-corrector to remind me that germanic language users misspell it

[Qilin]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Exactly because the definition of shounen has been reduced incorrectly to a subset (the action battle subset) - instead either of "titles for boys" or "action battle stories". That leaves the entirety of the rest of shounen adrift to be mislabeled by people who are misusing the word "shounen". If the only "pie" I know is apple pie and I encounter a peach pie, I'm going to put it over in some other category in some arm-waving manner as those store employees did.

I still don't understand how the given example could be a consequence of the term becoming widespread. The argument was that acceptance of both usages would result in confusion between the usage of the two, but I fail to see how that is shown from the example that was given. Without further clarification, it looks like something from the deep end of the slippery slope.

The way I see it, all this confusion can be avoided by simply being aware of the contexts by which both usages are appropriate. Rather than advocate absolute uniformity of terms, I think it's much more practical to simply distinguish different contexts from one another. Unlike the issue with "slice of life" the alternate definitions of the term take place in entirely different contexts. Why would you interpret "shounen" to mean the genre when the discussion is clearly about demographics? Likewise, why would you interpret it to mean a demographic when the conversation is referring to genres?

Just about every language I know has a handful of redundant terms, but hardly any confusion occurs because people know how to distinguish between contexts of usage.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Malkuth

... and that's an excellent way to confuse more people... especially the shojo/shoujo, until I hit the kanji in a manga I realized how many times I had misinterpreted it.

Anyway, wikipedia aside (which is not always correct), the two above are the commonly accepted transliteration systems for long vowels in japanese. Now of course people unfamiliar with the language, culture, etc. are free to do as they please, but that does not change the fact that they are confusing others, which was the point of the discussion (in the last few pages at least)

PS: and indeed, I am writing toukyou for my auto-corrector to remind me that germanic language users misspell it

That's how it is Japanese, it bears no relation to English. Shojo(girl) and Shonen(boy) are loanwords into english, Virgin, and beginning of an era, are not, so it's not important.

Also, in English, they're homophones anyway. English doesn't really distinguish between long and short vowels, they're considered homophones. Which is why it means the same thing to write shoujo, or Shojo. Long and short is usually more a result of emphasis.

In fact, almost all Japanese loanwords into english are mispronounced compared to Japanese. For instance, Anime, and Manga are pronounced Aw-nime, and maw-nga in the United States. In Britain and Ireland, it's the more correct Ahnime and mah-nga, and both sides of the atlantic make the mistake of using the ng sound instead the seperate n and g sounds (the ng sound doesn't exist in japanese).

And that goes for Shojo and Shonen to. In Ireland it's pronounced "Show-nen" when it should be "shou-nen". So quibling over long and short vowels is pretty pointless, when the degree of innaccuracy with which they're rendered by the common person is always much higher. This difference is only relevant if you're actually trying to speak Japanese, but for regular english usage is irrelevant.

In writing it's also irrelevant, because the standard Japanese romanization doesn't use ou or ō, but oo (which of course is very different in English, hence the use of o or ou for the loanword).

However compared to Japanese mangling of English loanwords, this stuff is pretty mild, to be honest. So I see nothing wrong with using whichever spelling or pronounciation is right, so long as it's generally recognisable in English.

[Malkuth]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

That's how it is Japanese, it bears no relation to English. Shojo(girl) and Shonen(boy) are loanwords into english, Virgin, and beginning of an era, are not, so it's not important.

Also, in English, they're homophones anyway. English doesn't really distinguish between long and short vowels, they're considered homophones. Which is why it means the same thing to write shoujo, or Shojo. Long and short is usually more a result of emphasis.

In fact, almost all Japanese loanwords into english are mispronounced compared to Japanese. For instance, Anime, and Manga are pronounced Aw-nime, and maw-nga in the United States. In Britain and Ireland, it's the more correct Ahnime and mah-nga, and both sides of the atlantic make the mistake of using the ng sound instead the seperate n and g sounds (the ng sound doesn't exist in japanese).

And that goes for Shojo and Shonen to. In Ireland it's pronounced "Show-nen" when it should be "shou-nen". So quibling over long and short vowels is pretty pointless, when the degree of innaccuracy with which they're rendered by the common person is always much higher. This difference is only relevant if you're actually trying to speak Japanese, but for regular english usage is irrelevant.

Butchering foreign words is a big issue with no simple answer. Japanese is not such a big issue, because all their sounds exists in english, including long vowels, despite not having an 1-1 correspondence in writing (that's an issue of all european writing systems and rooted in the monasteries of the middle ages), other languages have sounds that do not even exist in germanic languages.

In any case, my point is that writing and pronunciation from a reader without knowledge of the original language and/or term will be most likely wrong, as you also point out, so why not at least use a writing that will be understood by those familiar, without having to resort in thinking in both languages... that is the objective of transliteration to begin with... for pronunciation guidelines there is the IPA system, which far more comprehensive than any writing system based on linguistic evolution.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

In writing it's also irrelevant, because the standard Japanese romanization doesn't use ou or ō, but oo (which of course is very different in English, hence the use of o or ou for the loanword).

No, "oo" is not a long "o" like "ou" and "ō", e.g.

とっり　torri　-> short pause between to and ti
とり　　tori　 -> normally as one word
とおり　toori　-> after to add ori, unless your used to it sounds like the later two
とうり　touri　-> long "o"
とーり　to-ri　-> same as above to my knowledge

Similar is the issue with ん (n) when preceding なねぬにの (na-ne-nu-ni-no), it's bloody hard to tell the difference. But in romanization an apostrophe is usually added.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

However compared to Japanese mangling of English loanwords, this stuff is pretty mild, to be honest. So I see nothing wrong with using whichever spelling or pronounciation is right, so long as it's generally recognisable in English.

There I am 100% with you... it's almost at the level of abuse greek gets in all germanic languages.

[totoum]

Originally Posted by Qilin

Why in the world would those titles become labelled as "shoujo" when it is neither the right genre nor the right demographic for the two titles you mentioned?

Because if people start thinking that shonen is a genre then suddenly everything that doesn't fit that genre isn't shonen, so if it's not shonen then the only other option is shoujo.

And this isn't me saying it's something that might happen,it's already happened to me at a few manga stores,I go in looking for mangas like k-on,yotsuba& or azumanga daioh and I have to look for in the shoujo part of the store.
Another exemple is that about a week ago someone wrote on this forum "Toradora is more of a romentic comedy than a shonen".

[Malkuth]

... and then you get all that weird looks because they always put BL next to shoujo... on the other hand you can see the positive side that it great opportunity to meet cute diminutive asian girls

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Malkuth

Butchering foreign words is a big issue with no simple answer. Japanese is not such a big issue, because all their sounds exists in english, including long vowels, despite not having an 1-1 correspondence in writing (that's an issue of all european writing systems and rooted in the monasteries of the middle ages), other languages have sounds that do not even exist in germanic languages.

Yes, but several of them are considered variants of the same sound (while in Japan they're considered different). Long vs. Short vowels is just such an example of this. In English, whether you use long or short vowels is far more down to the accent (IE where you're from), then the word. So functionally they're homophones.

Also even if an english speaker can pronounce a word correctly, that doesn't mean they should. When a word gets adapted into a loanword, the sounds that sound awkward in their accent/language get replaced with close, but slightly different sounds. That's why Shounen becomes "Shownen". Shounen sounds awkward and weird in english. The Japanese "ou" sound is just considered a variant of aw or ooh.

Likewise, I'm sure when english words get loaned into greek, their pronounciation gets changed slightly to a form that might seem functionally identical to a Greek, but different to an Englishman. It's impossible to import a word and preserve all of their original pronounciations. Given the variation between dialects and accents alone it's not surprising. Heck, between the north and south of just my own city words are pronounced differently enough that a foreigner might think they're different words. For instance the th becomes a t (thing-> ting, three-> tree[the same as the plant!]). If you go to England, it's even worse, as all the rs at the end of words get dropped (car becomes cah)!

Also, it's important to bear in mind, that those words are extremely close together, it's entirely possible that in certain Japanese regional accents, those words are not distinguishable. Certainly an english speaker, using those words in an english conversation, would pronounce them all the same way. If they switched to Japanese, they'd pronounce them correctly (depending on the quality of their accent).

[quote]
In any case, my point is that writing and pronunciation from a reader without knowledge of the original language and/or term will be most likely wrong, as you also point out, so why not at least use a writing that will be understood by those familiar, without having to resort in thinking in both languages... that is the objective of transliteration to begin with... for pronunciation guidelines there is the IPA system, which far more comprehensive than any writing system based on linguistic evolution.
[quote]
There are lots of homophones in almost all languages, people have little trouble distinguishing them (in writing or otherwise), because you can tell based on context. You can tell that we're not talking about virgins, or the beginning of an era, based on the context of the thread.

とっり　torri　-> short pause between to and ti
とり　　tori　 -> normally as one word
とおり　toori　-> after to add ori, unless your used to it sounds like the later two
とうり　touri　-> long "o"
とーり　to-ri　-> same as above to my knowledge

As far as I'm aware, とうり can be either "the long o", but in standard Kana reading it's to-u-ri (3 syllables). The long o reading is a japanese corruption (IE it's read differently then it sounds). とーり would be more correct.

The problem with Shounen, as a romanization, is that it fails to distinguish between "Sho-u-nen" (3 syllables) and "Shou-nen" (2 syllables). That's why the accented version is used (it eliminated the confusion), however, in most english writing, the accent gets removed, so it becomes "shonen", much like Tōkyō becomes Tokyo.

The Japanese Kana system does not have a perfect correspondence with the spoken language, there are many irregularities, like the one above. Because pronounciation changes over time (and location...), but writing doesn't, these problems are inevitable.

There I am 100% with you... it's almost at the level of abuse greek gets in all germanic languages.

You're unlucky in that Greek is a prestige language, and the greek derived words have been in the language so long that they've all become changed beyond recognition.

[Malkuth]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Yes, but several of them are considered variants of the same sound (while in Japan they're considered different). Long vs. Short vowels is just such an example of this. In English, whether you use long or short vowels is far more down to the accent (IE where you're from), then the word. So functionally they're homophones.

Also even if an english speaker can pronounce a word correctly, that doesn't mean they should. When a word gets adapted into a loanword, the sounds that sound awkward in their accent/language get replaced with close, but slightly different sounds. That's why Shounen becomes "Shownen". Shounen sounds awkward and weird in english. The Japanese "ou" sound is just considered a variant of aw or ooh.

Likewise, I'm sure when english words get loaned into greek, their pronounciation gets changed slightly to a form that might seem functionally identical to a Greek, but different to an Englishman. It's impossible to import a word and preserve all of their original pronounciations. Given the variation between dialects and accents alone it's not surprising. Heck, between the north and south of just my own city words are pronounced differently enough that a foreigner might think they're different words. For instance the th becomes a t (thing-> ting, three-> tree[the same as the plant!]). If you go to England, it's even worse, as all the rs at the end of words get dropped (car becomes cah)!

Also, it's important to bear in mind, that those words are extremely close together, it's entirely possible that in certain Japanese regional accents, those words are not distinguishable. Certainly an english speaker, using those words in an english conversation, would pronounce them all the same way. If they switched to Japanese, they'd pronounce them correctly (depending on the quality of their accent).

There are lots of homophones in almost all languages, people have little trouble distinguishing them (in writing or otherwise), because you can tell based on context. You can tell that we're not talking about virgins, or the beginning of an era, based on the context of the thread.

But for all the reasons you mentioned, at least from my perspective (living abroad for almost a decade and using 90% of his time communicating in several foreign languages) it is more valuable to separate pronunciation from the the writing system in order to make all these distinction apparent at least to those who have a background, since everyone else is bound to be mistaken in one way or another. This approach at least minimizes the confusion when a context is established and the speakers are aware of each others' background

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

As far as I'm aware, とうり can be either "the long o", but in standard Kana reading it's to-u-ri (3 syllables). The long o reading is a japanese corruption (IE it's read differently then it sounds). とーり would be more correct.

That's a big problem I had when I begun learning japanese, since there were different somewhat "homebrew" transliteration systems targeting specific countries, and ignoring the original language. Same for german, english and french. It might yield quick benefits for those who want to half-learn a languge by picking up a handful of effective sentences for showing off or vacation, but ignores the cultural background, the mechanics, and the essence of the language.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

The problem with Shounen, as a romanization, is that it fails to distinguish between "Sho-u-nen" (3 syllables) and "Shou-nen" (2 syllables). That's why the accented version is used (it eliminated the confusion), however, in most english writing, the accent gets removed, so it becomes "shonen", much like Tōkyō becomes Tokyo.

It's even more complicated:

sho-ne-n
sho-n-e-n

vs

sho-u-ne-n
sho-u-n-e-n

and that's by ignoring the pause (っ) and dash (ー)

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

The Japanese Kana system does not have a perfect correspondence with the spoken language, there are many irregularities, like the one above. Because pronounciation changes over time (and location...), but writing doesn't, these problems are inevitable.

True, but the kana system is better than the french, english and greek systems that have a many-to-many relationship between reading and writing, and wayyyyyyyyyy better than kanji (the reason I begun learning japanese in between)

The best is the german (from the ones that I know in some extent), but there is a serious issue of divergance between the official language and everyday as well as dialects.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

You're unlucky in that Greek is a prestige language, and the greek derived words have been in the language so long that they've all become changed beyond recognition.

Well, it helps a lot with math and physics since for me when I get the pronunciation it is easy to grasp a concept since it makes perfect sense logically, but on the other hand it requires a serious effort to pronounce it "wrongly" otherwise no one will understand

PS: By the way, I don't want to sound authoritative or anything, it's just that I am using often foreign languages (both human but mainly "machine" ones), and always found it interesting more interesting their schematics rather than practical applications, despite ending up "relying" professionally on the later

[NK_500]

I think most of us missed the whole point on what the OP has been asking for. From what I can understand from his rant, wouldn't be annoying if you bought something that says "for boys" and yet inside it has lots of hot topless bishies which supposed to be in shoujo magazines instead. I really hate that to when it happens.

If I flip the coin, there's plenty of "shoujo" mangas which had graphic nudity, mostly female ones although not as "detailed" as any male-oriented ones(read: hentai).

[DonQuigleone]

[QUOTE=Malkuth;4168363]But for all the reasons you mentioned, at least from my perspective (living abroad for almost a decade and using 90% of his time communicating in several foreign languages) it is more valuable to separate pronunciation from the the writing system in order to make all these distinction apparent at least to those who have a background, since everyone else is bound to be mistaken in one way or another. This approach at least minimizes the confusion when a context is established and the speakers are aware of each others' background

That's a big problem I had when I begun learning japanese, since there were different somewhat "homebrew" transliteration systems targeting specific countries, and ignoring the original language. Same for german, english and french. It might yield quick benefits for those who want to half-learn a languge by picking up a handful of effective sentences for showing off or vacation, but ignores the cultural background, the mechanics, and the essence of the language.
[quote]
Of course, but we're not actually referring to the original word, but rather to an english borrowing of it. If this were to be a "how to speak japanese thread" I might agree with you, but this is isn't, instead we're referring to the english version of the japanese word, which can use either of the 3 spelling, because in English, all 3 can be read that way, and the word still hasn't taken on a single standard spelling yet. My guess is that if it did, it would be Shonen (using the same logic as Tokyo).

True, but the kana system is better than the french, english and greek systems that have a many-to-many relationship between reading and writing, and wayyyyyyyyyy better than kanji (the reason I begun learning japanese in between)

The best is the german (from the ones that I know in some extent), but there is a serious issue of divergance between the official language and everyday as well as dialects.

Well English is a rather absurd language, ghoti can (famously) be read as fish.

As far as I'm aware, the best language for spelling/writing is actually Korean. Korean Hangul has a 1 to 1 relationship between a symbol and it's pronounciation, is very easy to learn, and they don't use much hanja either...

Well, it helps a lot with math and physics since for me when I get the pronunciation it is easy to grasp a concept since it makes perfect sense logically, but on the other hand it requires a serious effort to pronounce it "wrongly" otherwise no one will understand

It's also possible that modern greek is the incorrect one, and that we're closer to the original word! Though it's difficult to ever know for certain.

For example in english, some circles believe that modern general american is closer to what was originally spoken in england 300 years ago, then the english of england today.

[Qilin]

Originally Posted by totoum

Because if people start thinking that shonen is a genre then suddenly everything that doesn't fit that genre isn't shonen, so if it's not shonen then the only other option is shoujo.

And this isn't me saying it's something that might happen,it's already happened to me at a few manga stores,I go in looking for mangas like k-on,yotsuba& or azumanga daioh and I have to look for in the shoujo part of the store.
Another exemple is that about a week ago someone wrote on this forum "Toradora is more of a romentic comedy than a shonen".

Please refer to my previous post for my more precise disagreement with the given analogy, particularly the parts mentioning the "slippery slope" and distinguishing between contexts as an alternative to absolute control of usage (which is an impractical venture).

Originally Posted by NK_500

I think most of us missed the whole point on what the OP has been asking for.

Some posters have already tackled the different angles of the problem in the earlier posts of this thread, but without clarifications from the first poster, it's hard to progress much further into that.

[Malkuth]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Of course, but we're not actually referring to the original word, but rather to an english borrowing of it. If this were to be a "how to speak japanese thread" I might agree with you, but this is isn't, instead we're referring to the english version of the japanese word, which can use either of the 3 spelling, because in English, all 3 can be read that way, and the word still hasn't taken on a single standard spelling yet. My guess is that if it did, it would be Shonen (using the same logic as Tokyo).

Well English is a rather absurd language, ghoti can (famously) be read as fish.

Again I these as reasons to use a transliteration preserving the original pronounciation on basis I explained in the previous posts.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

As far as I'm aware, the best language for spelling/writing is actually Korean. Korean Hangul has a 1 to 1 relationship between a symbol and it's pronounciation, is very easy to learn, and they don't use much hanja either...

I heard that to, but don't they shoot themselves on the foot by using hanja? As with japanese and other asian languages (not from the same linguistic group) they might be interesting to learn, but not very practical to use.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

It's also possible that modern greek is the incorrect one, and that we're closer to the original word! Though it's difficult to ever know for certain.

Not really, at least when I was in Greece, we were force to learn the basics of the Athenian dialact (c. 5-4th century BCE), so at least what for what archeaologists and linguists can reconstruct modern greek are closer to ancient than other languages. In addition despite the absence of a state the language has been in use since then (church, education, law, etc).

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

For example in english, some circles believe that modern general american is closer to what was originally spoken in england 300 years ago, then the english of england today.

That doesn't sound awfully logical, but not knowing the reasoning behind their thesis does not give much value to my opinion. But even if this is the case, the english language has a continuity and evolution through mechanisms within the kingdom of England, and I consider these more authoritative than what its former colonies (like USA and India) officially or not have, that have adapted the language at some point officially.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Malkuth

I heard that to, but don't they shoot themselves on the foot by using hanja? As with japanese and other asian languages (not from the same linguistic group) they might be interesting to learn, but not very practical to use.

Koreans use Hanja far less then the japanese do. In Korea it's the exception, rather then the rule (in contrast to Japanese). South koreans aren't taught hanja until year 7 (~ age 13). Usage of Hanja is decreasing, and it's mostly used for logos, specialised academic papers, or to clarify Hangul.

Compare the front page of the Korean wikipedia to the Japanese wikipedia. The Japanese wikipedia is at least half Kanji. I didn't see any hanja on the Korean page. You could probably learn Korean without ever touching any Hanja with little trouble.

That doesn't sound awfully logical, but not knowing the reasoning behind their thesis does not give much value to my opinion. But even if this is the case, the english language has a continuity and evolution through mechanisms within the kingdom of England, and I consider these more authoritative than what its former colonies (like USA and India) officially or not have, that have adapted the language at some point officially.

English English and American English diverged approximately 300 years ago. American English is just as valid, in terms of how close it is to the english of 300 years ago, as British English is. Likewise, Australian English is as well. Also, it's important to note, that unlike other languages, English has never been regulated by a state body (EG there is no equivalent of the "Academie Francaise"), English has always entirely been determined by the people speaking it, the native speakers outside of England are just as valid as those within it. Also, English has existed for a very long time outside of England, particularly in Wales and Scotland, but also parts of Ireland. Scots, in particular, is a full fledged dialect, though unfortunately dying. Here's an example of scots.

Some American dialects are not as valid as others, for instance those that are heavily influenced by immigrant groups (like New York English). General American is considered the most "conservative" form of American English, and hasn't changed much compared to other american dialects.

It's considered more likely to be closer to the English of 300 years ago then Received Pronounciation English for several reasons:

1. English English only became non-rhotic (IE Rs are not pronounced as spelled) after American English split off. American English preserved rhoticity, English English did not.

2. In England they started dropping Hs, they did not in America.

3. In England Ts started to be replaced with Glottal Stops

And more.

Changes have taken place in General American as well, but not to the same degree. This is partially due to it's nature as a kind of conglomeration of several regional accents that neutralized one anothers differences.

General American also more closely corresponds to the written language then English English. More letters are pronounced, while English English leaves many silent, or replaces them with a different sound entirely.

You can trace the lineage of English by looking at the dialects that split off at various times. In particular, American English corresponds to the English of ~1720s while Australian English corresponds to the English of ~1850s. They're are as valid approximants for those periods as modern RP. It can also be clearly seen that Australian English is closer to English English, due to it's more recent split. These two in particular are relevant because they're splits of English. Scottish English, for instance, is not, as it's a sister dialect to English, and never "split off" from it, but developed in tandem. Likewise Irish English(though it integrated many elements of Irish).

It's as likely that Shakespeare was performed in a pronounciation similiar to that of modern Cleveland or Chicago, as modern London.

[Fuyuno]

Sorry if I bring this thread again but there just no decent threads which had recent posts. I also don't much opportunity to log in this forum either.

Originally Posted by Random32

GFantasy (the magazine for Kuroshitsuji) doesn't really have much of "shounen" shounen, it seems like it never had. Guys that like "shounen" shounen never really were the target of the magazine.

For some reasons I missed this post in first page. Maybe that's why I overlooked to it. By the way you are telling that Kuroshitsuji is made for girls who tired of shoujo romance mangas and craving for action bishies instead. Maybe there's a good reason why it had "G" in "GFantasy". "Girls' Fantasy" perhaps?

I think most of my problems would be solved if they can made completely new genre for Kuroshitsuji and some other similar titles are labeled as "bishounen action mangas for girls" instead of slapping word "shounen" on them.

[totoum]

Originally Posted by Fuyuno

Maybe there's a good reason why it had "G" in "GFantasy". "Girls' Fantasy" perhaps?.

The G stands for Gangan because GFantasy is part of Gangan comics if it stood for Girl then the magazine would be a shoujo magazine.

Again,it all depends on where the bishonen action manga gets published,if it gets published in a shonen magazine then it's labelled a shonen,if it's published in a shoujo magazine (like for exemple the manga adaptation of the anime K) then it's a shoujo.