Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 May 22

= May 22 =

Expedition to Manchoukuo
It is a book title: 第一次満蒙学術調査研究団報告 Can anyone transliterate this Japanese title into Latin letters and translate it into English, too? 79.219.189.113 (talk) 07:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * 'Dai Ichi Ji Man Mou Gaku Jutsu Chou Sa Ken Kyuu Dan Hou Koku'. It means 'First Report From the Research Group on the Mongolian Academic Investigations Survey', or something to that effect. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 08:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't "the first report" be 満蒙学術調査研究団第一次報告, though? I don't know the background, but if there were several of these research groups then this could also be understood as "the report of the first [...] group". (Bear in mind, I'm not a hundred percent sure of this interpretation myself.) TomorrowTime (talk) 08:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected. You are right. Sorry, I was in a hurry to get my work permit for Korea. I will concentrate more from now on. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 03:22, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think "満" refers to Manchuria. "満蒙" is in the titles of some Japanese Wikipedia articles. In those contexts, "満蒙" refers to a geographic region that includes Manchuria and Inner Mongolia. Someone who understands Japanese please confirm this. --173.49.10.162 (talk) 12:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It refers mainly to Mongolia (or Inner Mongolia), but can include Manchuria. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 03:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

@ Kagetora: And that is what I mean - I have got another transliteration, very similar to yours: Dai ichiji Mammō gakujutsu chōsa kenkyūdan hōkoku. Which one is correct now?

And if it was the second, what have I to change in the Japanese title: Second Report from the Research Group on the Mongolian Academic Survey ? 79.219.189.113 (talk) 09:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Second' would be done by replacing 第一次 with 第二次 (dainiji). --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 03:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, you can google it easily. There's even a sypnosis...--K.C. Tang (talk) 13:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * As for the transliterations, both are correct. Kagetora's version is written kanji letter by letter and OP's version is a word by word transliteration. What else do you want to know? Oda Mari (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * KT's is also a bit more literal in representing long vowels with an extra vowel letter, corresponding to how they would be written in kana, rather than with a macron. —Tamfang (talk) 01:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thank you very much! Can anybody translate the term "Second Report from the Research Group on the Mongolian Academic Survey." into Japanese? 79.219.189.113 (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I checked the database of National Diet Library. The page is here. It's 第一次満蒙学術調査研究団報告　第２部. Oda Mari (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No, this entry does count to the First Report, too. Maybe there is no second report, but I am interested in the then hypothetical translation of "Second Report from the Research Group on the Mongolian Academic Survey." into Japanese, (refering to the translation of the First Report). 79.219.189.113 (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You seem to misunderstand something. 第一次/daiichiji is not the number of report, but it means the first survey group as TomorrowTime pointed out above. BTW, I am a native Japanese speaker. Oda Mari (talk) 16:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I am very sorry! You are right! Can you translate the entry of National Diet Library to get a correct translation? 79.219.189.113 (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Click the external link provided by K. C. Tang. I think that the official translation of the title. Oda Mari (talk) 17:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It's Report of the First Scientific Expedition to Manchoukuo. Ignore the "Section IV.Part I." part. The Japanese title you provided above doesn't have that part. Oda Mari (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * But in that external link, in the title "第一次満蒙学術調査研究団報告" are no kanji meaning "Manchoukuo" . That's confusing. 79.219.130.158 (talk) 11:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That's exactly why I translated it as the Mongolian region (including Manchuria). --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 16:08, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Then the translation would be Report of the First Scientific Expedition to Manchuria and Mongolia or Report of the First Scientific Expedition to Manchukuo and Mongolia. And the NDL page is here. The report are divided into six parts. Oda Mari (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the 蒙 in the report title might be Mengjiang. If so, the title would be ...Manchukuo and Mengjiang. Then the linked title is not necessarily wrong because Mengjiang was part of Japan then and could be thought as a part of Manchukuo. Oda Mari (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Mengjiang was a puppet state, wasn't it? As was Manchukuo? They were never formally annexed by Japan. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry for my poor wording, but both of them were controlled by Japan, weren't they? Anyway, I think Report of the First Scientific Expedition to Manchoukuo is the official translation in English. 満 should be the shortened form of 満州国. See this result of G search. See also the map then and think about the report was written in 1934 to 1940. Oda Mari (talk) 07:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Display of Kanji
http://www.flickr.com/photos/16799305@N05/3554372076/

I have a little request: In this link above is a marked term of Japanese Kanji. I could not find the second kanji in the charmap to input it into the computer. Can anybody display this kanji here so that I can copy and paste it into the computer? Thank you, 79.219.189.113 (talk) 14:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

似我峰上科 TomorrowTime (talk) 14:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. 79.219.189.113 (talk) 15:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

The above sentence is incorrect, it should be 似我蜂上科, it is a type of wasp and should therefore have the insect radical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.68.252.207 (talk) 21:22, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

What is meant when someone signs a message sends?
I work with Fred. Fred is mostly unintelligible. All of his e-mail is overly formal, unclear and seems to be an effort by him to just work in big words so it makes him sound (to him) as if he knows what he's talking about.

He ends the body of every message with "Fred sends". He used to be in the military and so I think he is just trying to make sure we know that.

Can anyone explain exactly what is meant by ending a message with sends? Can anyone shed some light on its origin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.182.3 (talk) 22:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I am unfamiliar with ending a message in this way, and I don't think it's Military-Speak. Tempshill (talk) 22:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I used to have a friend in Japan who used to sign all of his emails and SMS messages with 'Yuusuke deshita' (Yuusuke was his name, and 'deshita' means '[that] was'). It was his way of standing out and being different. Probably the same with Fred. Not military-speak at all. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 03:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Have you ever considered asking him why he ends his messages in that way? You may find he's not the way you appear to think Nil Einne (talk) 18:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Might it be the electronic equivalent of those pads of paper that have printed at the top, "From the desk of "? I have a friend who mischievously wrote back to "Dear desk of ". BrainyBabe (talk) 23:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)