Talk:Chūhai

Is this drink
availble anywhere outside of Japan?--Ccoolidge 03:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

rename (back) to chu-hi?
While the actual pronunciation of the beverage in question is 'chuuhai', the standard romaji for it seems to be 'chu-hi' everywhere I've seen... and WP:MOS(Japan) says "Names should be romanized according to common usage". So - any objections to this? --moof 13:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The romaji is still "chūhai" or "chuuhai". (Romaji never reads "hi" as /haI/ (long i) ; it's always /hi/ (short i).) The "chu-hi" you're seeing is a partially anglicized way of writing the word. It seems to me that the beverage compnies (especially TaKaRa) prefer "chu-hi" while some books and websites may write "chu-hai" and the like. I can't determine which is more common. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 14:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree about the romaji version (and how you'd actually want to pronounce it); however, I'm being pedantic in differentiating "romaji" from "romanization", particularly in light of the example given in #8 of "body text":

Names should be romanized according to common usage (see below), which includes unconventional romanizations by licensees (e.g., Devil Hunter Yohko and Tenjho Tenge). While I'm hardly religious about the issue, I think it's a situation that hasn't shown up terribly often before (i.e. a nonstandard romanization 'by Japanese' of a Japanese term). And for what it's worth, I based my original message from skimming the various labels of the beverage in question at the supermarket: nowhere did I see chūhai, only chi-hi. Clearly, more drinking research is needed. --moof 21:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Rename rehash, three years later...
It is marketed as Chu Hi. It should be renamed. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per WPJ MOS, corporate branding is not equivalent to proper name. "Lame" is not a valid move reason-you'll have to request a move, this one is contested. Oh, and repeatedly rename warring when the namechange is contested is a great way to get ANI. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 20:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Just a passing anon here, but I have never once seen 'Chu-hi' romanized any other way. Furthermore the character decomposition into romanji would indeed be chu for the initial portion, but the name of modern 'chu-hi' beverages incorporates the 'hi' as a borrowed word in situ rather than as a katakana-fied / romanj-ified word. The 'Hi' is not a representation of a Japanese character any more than it would be if it were written Chu - High. It is for aesthetic reasons that the shortened 'Hi' is used, but it is most certainly not 'Hai', nor is it a character of either Japanese or Korean origins. We see similar conventions with other borrowed words like 'mega', 'up', etc which are incorporated into names of products and/or brands as their English originals. Even moreso, since this is not a word that is *also* regularly incorporated as a katakana word (highball) in branding, it is quite obvious that this is a two-language name that does not need the overdone sensitivity of attempting to correct the spelling to 'hai' for reasons not realy known to me as a Japanese. The 'reading' of the romanji is totally irrelevant as it is not a romanji spelling but the English word 'hi'. In addition the spelling 'Chu-Hi' most definitely satisfies the 'common usage' muster above. I hope this may clear up things some way and I apologize for my grammar at times. -173.166.45.177 (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

why the advertising?
there's a one-off mention of coca cola bringing a product to market that seems inappropriate given it has no preceding context, perhaps if there were some discussion of the commonly available brands beforehand it would be appropriate but as stands now it reads as a compromised addition perhaps made by an interested party 114.175.177.104 (talk) 06:46, 29 July 2023 (UTC)