Talk:Japanese pronouns

Old
What about "Washi"? Shouldn't it be listed, too? 82.135.90.245 10:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Could somebody add more lengthy discussion of under what circumstances each pronoun would be used? --Kenji Yamada 05:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Isn't there a rather rude pronoun for "you", "temee" or something. 惑乱 分からん 12:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe 爾 is also a character for "nanji"/なんじ, as indicated hereabouts: http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi?1D. --138.16.27.161 20:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary includes きんじ "kinji" < kimuti, which is written 君, same as きみ "kimi". Allegedly, 君 kinji = 君 kimi + 貴 muchi, just like 汝 nanji = 汝 na + 貴 muchi. It's interesting that 貴 is used in the vast majority of Japanese second personal pronouns, yet (according to Wiktionary) it is not used as a second personal pronoun by itself. 187.23.88.129 (talk) 01:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

What does this even mean?
From the article:
 * The Japanese language does not have pronouns as a grammatical category of words. Rather, the various words for "I", "you", "we", "they", and so on function as nouns for the purposes of sentence structure, grammar, and syntax.

If a word functions as a substitute for a noun, isn't it by definition a pronoun? What makes Japanese unique such that you don't consider these words to be pronouns? &mdash;Umofomia 09:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe the least subtle difference is it's ordinary usage and grammatical to modify them like normal nouns - "the tall he", "the short me" - where that's awkward at best in many languages like English. --138.16.27.161 19:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Both of the two most authoritative Japanese monolingual dictionaries 広辞苑 and 大辞林 label わたし, あなた, etc. as pronouns. Maybe it's safe enough to say that Japanese does have pronouns, while it is certain that they don't have declensions that English pronouns have, and that there is no particular grammatical difference between Japanese pronouns and nouns other than the function as a substitution. --Tohru 07:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Japanese has pronouns are only pronouns to the extent that they fulfill a function analogous to pronouns in other languages (such as English). But if we're talking about word class, we must appeal to typologically-relevant morphosyntactic (grammatical) criteria, which daimeishi do not seem to satisfy, but perhaps this is a point worth exploring in the article. Many linguistic articles on Wikipedia are sorely lacking in typological perspective, and this discussion is well worth including. 193.121.151.107 (talk) 10:57, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

The statement "Japanese does not have pronouns" is often taught to learners of the Japanese language, but (as Umofomia wrote above) the fact that they function as a substitute for a noun does make them pronouns. It seems that there are (at least) two reasons why we are taught this. The main reason is to discourage us from using them too often: pronouns are not used as frequently in Japanese compared to many other languages, and sometimes their use is rude. The second reason is that most Japanese pronouns are not pure: they have other meanings. In English the common pronouns have no other meaning: for example, "I", "you", and "they" have no other use except as pronouns. But in Japanese the words used as pronouns have other meaning: 私 means "private" or "personal"; 僕 means "manservant". Marty Pauley (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Temae
Temae has a meaning of I, too. The word is also used with domo(共,ども). Temae-domo, meaning we, mostly used by store or ryokan workers to customers in a humble way. And domo is not a pronoun, but a suffix. Oda Mari 08:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think this comment touches on a number of important weaknesses in this article. I don't think it's sufficiently clear that -domo, -ra, -tachi are suffixed to (conventionally) singular words.  Also you have 3rd person -ra as "very informal".  This is this is true of aitsu-ra, but not for kare-ra and (much rarer) kanojo-ra; both often found in newspapers and other formal writing.


 * There is also the issue of secondary uses of some pronouns for a different person, e.g. boku (conventionally 1st person) used to refer to addressee, or kare (conventionally 3rd person) used to refer to addressee, in addition to the example of temae-domo mentioned above. Perhaps this merits a (sourced) section discussing it - simply adding these uses to the tables would not distinguish between primary and secondary uses of these words.


 * This article could be improved by (1) clearly indicating the difference between archaic and current pronoun-like forms as well as changes in level of formality (maybe there's a separate article or two waiting to be written about this?), and (2) a discussion of the dominant thoughts on how these words should be classified and how they are used in Japanese and a focus on this, rather than trying to list up all Japanese pronouns. Since the category has unclear boundaries, I'm not sure this would be possible anyway.  I'm sorry I'm not able to cite more specifics, but there is a considerable body of research in Japanese and some in English dealing with this class of words (a useful English reference is Takao Suzuki (sociolinguist)'s Words in context).  125.175.181.79 13:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Chin
Isn't 朕 (chin) used by the Emperor of Japan as a first-person pronoun? JadziaLover (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It was. Not after the WW2. Oda Mari (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Additions from the "Gender Difference Wiki article"
I've noticed that there are some words that can be found at the wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_differences_in_spoken_Japanese that have not been included in the list, just thought I'd mention it, they are 自分(じぶん), そちら　and こいつ. If you view the page you can find out what each means, besides 自分　which it doesn't list. - Gav 81.77.170.56 (talk) 17:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Usage of the You's
Just wondering, since it is prefered to use a persons name, can anyone state any occasions/situations when you must or need to use you. I can only think of using anata when you don't know someone's name(such as a stranger) or if again if you're annoyed to a certain degree with a stranger(omae, kisama etc), but what about kimi when would you use that, "men to close friends, lovers; superiors (including women) to inferiors" is what the link in my last post says, I can understand workers, a boss may be close and not know their names but what about "close" friends is it used to emphasize the closeness. Thanks for any help I'm only a begginer and I'd like to know the language properly. - Gav 81.77.170.56 (talk) 17:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * As the article says, we omit 'you' most of the time. I cannot tell when we must to use you. It depends. And when we use 'you', we use it without thinking. I mean the choice is unconsciously made. As for 'kimi', I cannot answer the question. Because I'm a woman and never use kimi. Oda Mari (talk) 18:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Since you have used the word "we", I can safely assume if I didn't already know that you are Japanese. The sentense about kimi "I cannot answer the question, because I'm a women and never use kimi" says to me that kimi is a male term. So I have updated its usage. - Gav 81.77.170.56 (talk) 11:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No, it's not a male term. The reason that I don't use 'kimi' is I'm not in the situation and personally I feel uncomfortable to use it. Female school teachers use it. Addition: as for 'anata', wives use it to husband a lot. Think it as 'darling'. Oda Mari (talk) 14:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Usage of Ano Hito
I noticed that Ano Hito is often used in reference to a loved one, often a husband that is dead. As a respectful way to refer to the dead, instead of calling their name. I'm not sure if I could find a source for this, but I thought I would put it out there because maybe someone has a reference?--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 19:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Merging
Does the gender differences in spoken Japanese page really need to be separate from this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.151.45 (talk) 15:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Gender differences In Japanese are by no means limited to pronouns. The fact that the article at the moment doesn't cover other differences doesn't warrant the merging. Urashima Tarō (talk) 09:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree with Tarou. Even the article says: "The words Japanese speakers use to refer to other people are part of the more encompassing system of Japanese honorifics and should be understood within that frame. The choice of pronoun will depend on the speaker's social status compared to the listener, the subject, and the objects of the statement." This system of Japanese honorifics - which is related in part to gender differences - affects all kinds of words. I wonder why the merging request hasn't been canceled yet.--Quinceps (talk) 19:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Since almost a month has passed since the merging proposal (by an anonymous editor) and the two messages posted in this dialog are strongly against it, I decided to keep both.

Urashima Tarō (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

それ, これ etc.
Is there any reason why それ, これ, あれ, だれ etc. aren't listed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.33.236 (talk) 12:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's any. I didn't notice that the article contained personal pronouns only. Demonstrative pronouns must be included. Oda Mari (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I added これ, それ, あれ and だれ, but there are others in this series whose status I am not sure about, such as ここ, そこ etc., こちら, そちら, etc. Do these count as pronouns? Also, どなた was another I wondered about. 86.160.209.216 (talk) 02:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Better sources needed
Two of the sources cited for much of the information on this page may be unreliable. "Japan Reference" describes itself as "mining [the web] for hidden data related to almost every aspect of Japan". The sources it 'mines' may or may not be reliable. "8.1 Pronouns" is a section of the web site "Teach Yourself Japanese", which is apparently self-published by TAKASUGI Shinji. The information does not appear to be obviously wrong, but published grammars or textbooks – perhaps printed on dead trees – would be more reliable. Cnilep (talk) 02:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Rewrite for clarity
Really, one of the most confusingly written articles I've read in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.18.221.197 (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

(own name) Entry
Not to nit pick but isn't (own name) a noun? Why is it in the pronoun section? Chrononem  &#9742;  16:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Etymology section has no etymology
This is a horrifically confusing article that presents a very superficial analysis of Japanese pronouns with unnecessarily complex terminology. The average person doesn't know terms like "deictic," etc., and the article could be rewritten either to define terms or to use more widely accessible terms. I actually think this article should be deleted in its current form, as it conveys very little information and does so poorly.

The etymology section contains no etymology, not even watakushi or Nara-era forms like a/are/ware/nare. The second and third persons are not addressed at all! Register is not addressed!108.177.128.155 (talk) 16:16, 25 November 2017 (UTC)Mobu

about boku
While technically more male than female, it’s used often enough by tomboyish girls (in fiction; more likely in Osaka) that it’s ambivalent enough to work. Masterball2 (talk) 18:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Bad source for claim about not having pronouns
On the page, it says: In linguistics, generativists and other structuralists suggest that the Japanese language does not have pronouns as such, since, unlike pronouns in most other languages that have them, these words are syntactically and morphologically identical to nouns.[1]

The reference is to https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1997.0021, which is a paper that refers repeatedly to Japanese pronouns, as such, implying their existence. First sentence in the abstract, in fact, implies the language has pronouns: "It is well known that personal pronouns in Japanese such as kare 'he' and kanozyo 'she', ..."

I'm adding a tag for disputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:2E05:8700:A12E:62CA:579F:EF6D (talk) 17:12, 25 July 2020 (UTC)