Re: $B@:NO(B

From: Kevin Wayne Williams (kww.nihongo_at_verizon.nut)
Date: 07/07/04 

Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 22:00:59 -0700

jim_breen@idontreadhotmail.com wrote:

> Bart Mathias <mathias@hawaii.edu> dixit:
>
>>jim_breen@idontreadhotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>necoandjeff <spam@schrepfer.com> dixit:
>>>
>>>>Generally, combining a verb and a noun as you had in mind would only involve
>>>>the base of the verb (just like tabemono and kaimono.)
>>>
>>>Generally yes, but for $B$+$$$b$N(B you have $BGcJ*(B and $BGc$$J*(B. Dictionaries
>>>are divided on the form they give (Daijirin has $BGc(B($B$$(B)$BJ*(B). According
>>>to Google $BGc$$J*(B leads $BGcJ*(B by about 2:1.
>
>
>>I don't understand the "Generally yes, but" part. Were you going to
>>present an exception to that rule?
>
>
> Well, isn't $B$+$$$b$N(B an exception? Or is $BGc$$(B/$B$+$$(B the base of
> $BGc$&(B?
>
> I'd have formulated Jeff's rule as the "$B$^$9(B stem of the verb"
> rather than the "base of the verb", but then I'm far behind Jeff
> in Japanese skills. I just wanted to warn Konrad off constructing
> things like $B@vJ*(B/$B$"$i$b$N(B on the assumption that $B@v(B/$B$"$i(B was the
> base of $B@v$&(B.

In this case, I think Jeff just expressed himself a little sloppily. "$B$^(B
$B$9(B stem of the verb" is certainly the normal case, and $BGcJ*(B and $BGc$$J*(B
are both expressions of that rule, just a little bit of irregular
orthography.

KWW