Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- From: Bart Mathias <mathias@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 01:37:00 GMT
jwb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Paul Blay <ask_me_or_get_spam_trapped@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> dixit:
>
>>I was just wondering what the logic was behind 火 having a
>>reading of -び in kanjidic (and presumably other dictionaries)
>>but 人 not having a reading of びと.
>
>
> Dunno about logic. Much of the early population of readings
> in kanjidic came from popular 漢和辞典. One such, the Classic Nelson,
> has -bi as a reading for 火, but not -bito for 人.
>
> I guess old Andrew was trying to point out that when 火 was in
> a later position in a word, it was read び, not ひ. (In one case at
> least, 天火, it can be read ぴ.) But AFAICT the same goes for
> 人 & びと.
And ぴと.
I had a friend who used to quote somebody downplaying consistency, but
now I'm old and can't remember it anymore. As I recall it *meant*
something like only fools would get hung up on it.
Bart
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- From: Louise Bremner
- Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- References:
- Reading or euphonic change?
- From: Paul Blay
- Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- From: jwb
- Reading or euphonic change?
- Prev by Date: Re: EDICT entry : zei + utatane + jukan + suihan [REPOST]
- Next by Date: Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- Previous by thread: Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- Next by thread: Re: Reading or euphonic change?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|