Talk:Kagoshima dialect

良XXございます

いいでございます ii de gozaimasu is perfectly fine in standard Japanese, please refer to the following results. The adverbial form ようございます is considered archaic (vestiges of which still remain in a few fixed expressions such as おはようございます ohayou gozaimasu), as the adjective 良い ii becomes 良く yoku in modern Japanese rather than 良う you. Regardless, 良うございます turns up very little in comparison, and I believe that Xう+ございます is now more of a Kansai form. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ

As you write, Xうございます is archaic as colloquial speech irrespective of Kanto or Kansai. But Xうございます is not an obsolete grammar, still used in formal speech and many Japanese dictionaries carry Xうございます as modern standard Japanese grammar, not Xいでございます. I feel いいでございます is non-standard grammar (joke style or halting style). It is better write both of いいでございます and ようございます, at least. --Kyoww (talk) 03:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, although I'm not entirely convinced that いいでございます carries an amusing connotation, especially considering the number of results, I see no harm in adding both variations, but I may consider going with your suggestion instead. Would you still lean towards the -u ending if you were faced with applying the honorific form to the following phrases: "(...)考えればいいですか", or "(...)の方がいいですか" ? — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 00:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. The factor of sense of incongruity for いいでございます may be a motley combination of a colloquial word いい and a formal word でございます. It is somewhat archaic or extra-polite (like high-class department store assistants) that not only -u ending but also でございます now. So I think いいです or よいです or よろしいです are more natural honorific forms than いいでございます as modern colloquial speech. I'll use 考えればよろしいですか (よろしいでしょうか) or …の方がよろしいですか (よろしいでしょうか) in your suggestion situation. I feel 考えればようございますか or …の方がようございますか are archaic and extra-honorific form, 考えればいいでございますか or …の方がいいでございますか are unnatural honorific form.--Kyoww (talk) 02:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, it never even occurred to me to use よろしい there. Though for now I'm going to stick to comparing basic examples between ごわす and ござる; but I've still got some work to do in that section, so I might end up providing a few other examples. — On a slightly unrelated note, seeing as how you're familiar with the Kansai dialect, how would you describe the difference or relationship between the auxiliary verbs やす and やんす? I ask, because I'm having a hard time understanding a similar phenomenon with many Kagoshima verbs that end in -su, but have a variant ending in -nsu: such as gowasu~gowansu, yasu~yansu, ojasu~ojansu, mosu~monsu, etc. Any ideas? — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 05:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Well... I'm not familier with Kagoshima dialect, so I'm sorry that I can't offer reliable ideas about -su and -nsu. In Kansai dialect, both of やす and やんす were born in Geisha communities of Kyoto/Osaka in Edo period and used in similar situation, as both of 尊敬語 (≒-(r)aremasu) and 丁寧語 (≒(de) gozaimasu and -masu). Differences: original form and imperative form of やす are same but やんす changes やんせ in imperative form; やす is often used with お like a standard honorific form おX になる; やんす is an obsolete phrase (Edo period speech) but やす is still used in traditional speech mainly in Kyoto.--Kyoww (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

/g/ & /r/ & /u/ & /w/

Fixed the IPA per the letters used in the C table. (There was one /y/ > /j/ in there too.) Separate edits in case you want to undo one of them.

When you say the /u/ is "slightly more rounded" than in standard J, do you mean it's actually [u] (that is, [ɯʷ]), rather than compressed [ɯᵝ]? — kwami (talk) 07:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

kw, gw "almost" solely before /a/: does anything else occur? Even if no, do /we wi wo/ exist? — kwami (talk) 04:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll probably end up removing the mention about the vowel [u] to keep it undefined. The note was mostly meant to oppose the pronunciation used in the Tokyo dialect, which is largely described as being slightly centralized, and somewhat unrounded and compressed. From what I can tell, the vowel lacks these properties in Kagoshima, but at the same time, it's not quite the same is in English or French. Without any formal study on the matter, it's hard to say much.

As for the labio-velars, they can occur:

1. in some native lexemes (鍬 kwa "hoe"; くゎくゎら kwakwara "Smilax china"; こしっくゎろ koshikkwaro "that guy") and mimetics, often as a result of /Cuwa/, /Cowa/ → /Cʷa/;
2. as allophones of well-established forms (ごぁす～ぐゎす gwasu instead of ごわす gowasu, or emphatic くぉら kwora for こら kora);
3. in verbal constructions linked to the sequence /Cu(w)V/, as in 食ゎっすっ kwassuʔ (standard 食わせる kuwaseru), くぇ kwe (standard 食え kue), せっくぉかい sekkwo kai (standard してあげようか shite ageyou ka).

As the labial series wi, wu, we, and wo don't occur, and sequences like /ui/ and /uu/ become /i/ and /u/, it leaves very little room for other types of labialized sequences to arise. But kwe~gwe and kwo~gwo are possible via the change /CuV/ → /CʷV/, just very rare. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 07:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Might be a good idea to have a short phonotactics section to list which CV combos, like *we, wi, do not occur. Yotsugana and /e~je/ could go there as well.

If we don't know exactly what /u/ is, it'd still be nice to note it's not exactly like Tokyo /u/. — kwami (talk) 08:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

To do list

This is just a reminder for myself to:

• Distribution section
  • Reconsider the Satsuma/Osumi/Morokata division (it's not accurate)
  • Make better mention of Tanegashima, Koshikijima & Makurazaki City
• Rework entire phonology section
  • Mention vowel length in Tanegashima
  • Check for a better source on intervocalic voicing of consonants (Southern Satsuma, Tanegashima)
  • Find a source on possible shi~su merger due to devoicing
  • Mention some other partial changes (no, mo > n; to > tsu ~> Q; awa > o)
  • Find sources and discuss Tanegashima, Koshikijima and Makurazaki pitch accent systems
• Create phonotactics section
  • Basic syllable (C)(j)V(N/Q/S)
  • Mention reanalysis of finals (e.g. --N + V > --NnV); or should this be in phono processes?
  • Should we consider /kʷ/ or /kw/?
• Destroy entire particles section to break each one down with examples
  • Remember that topic particle acts differently between dialects (cf. Sat-Osu, Tanegashima, Izumi, Koshikijima x4)
• Continue with verbs section
  • Find a source explaining use of i-form in place of plain form/imperfective
  • Discuss polite verbal forms in separate section (cf. -su, -nsu, mosu, yaru, yasu, etc.)
  • Reconsider presentation of information
• Consider vocabulary and expressions
• Write a 'current status of dialects' section
  • Dialects in disappearance, some features holding over (e.g. pitch accent, particles)
  • Cultural aspect (plays, books, dictionaries)
  • Mainstream media (perception by standard speakers; characters in anime and manga)
  • Effect of standard language on dialects

For everything:

• Verify wording
• Check sources, remove some, add some esp. to newly written sections
• Consider splitting some sections into new pages (cf. phonology, particles, verbs)
• Provide more examples (Should we gloss?)
• Provide a better dialect comparison (New section? Discuss relation to Amami Ryukyuan? Relation to Hachijo-Daito?)
• Decide on table uniformity (colours? or no colours?)

... And then never be finished with this article :) — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 05:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Is there anything remaining that makes the article inappropriate for mainspace? — kwami (talk) 04:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Although I would have liked to be able to redo at least the particles section, I'm currently lacking the time to get to it. And seeing as all these redirects to my user page are just going to be problematic, you can move this to the main space. Though I'm not sure whether to pick "Satsugū Dialect" or "Kagoshima Dialect" for the page title. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 22:59, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I'll keep the current name, since it's more familiar to English speakers. — kwami (talk) 01:29, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Lexical similarity to Standard Japanese

Just an observation. Reading the intro, the following part stands out to me:

Although not classified as a separate language, the Satsugū dialect is commonly cited for its mutual unintelligibility to even its neighbouring Kyūshū variants, despite sharing more than three-quarters of the Standard Japanese vocabulary corpus and some areal features of Kyūshū.

Ryukyuan languages#Classification and varities mentions that "[t]he Kagoshima dialect of Japanese, however, is 80% lexically similar to Standard Japanese".

As mentioned on Talk:Tsakonian language#70% similarity, however, the conventional cut-off for a separate language (as opposed to a dialect) in lexicostatistics is 85%. According to this metric, even lexically speaking, the Kagoshima "dialect" is a separate language (if barely). (According to the lexicostatistic research mentioned there, 80% lexical similarity means 1000 years of separate existence on average, in any case, and is definitely just enough for a variety to count as an Abstandsprache, to use Heinz Kloss's term, even according to the older cut-off.)

So, on a purely structural-linguistic (not political or sociolinguistic) level, the Kagoshima "dialect" could technically be called a separate language from Japanese.

That said, I am very well aware that the dialect/language separation is ultimately arbitrary, a purely social convention overlain with a lot of bigotry, and not very meaningful in linguistics; thus few linguists seriously care about it. However, Wikipedia's lay readers are likely to care and find this information interesting. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:05, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kagoshima dialect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131230232810/http://libopa.fukuoka-edu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10780/877/1/1006-sugimura_2010.pdf to http://libopa.fukuoka-edu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10780/877/1/1006-sugimura_2010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Tagging of non-English words

@Io Katai: Sorry I didn't notice the {{cleanup lang}} tag had been previously applied and that you already added {{lang}} tags added all over the place back in 2019. (And thanks for that!) I was just going off an automated report, and given the large number of items I just assumed it hadn't been done at all. It looks like the remaining items are actually transliterations into Latin characters, so {{transl}} is probably more appropriate. The words that showed up in the report as possible typos are:

kare(ba), kere(ba), w)a, w)a, t)chi, sa(a), nna(ni), konyu(n), sonyu(n), anyu(n), donyu(n), noyou(ni), konoyou(ni), sonoyou(ni), tchi(i), kotchi(i), sotchi(i), atchi(i), dotchi(i), y)uru, kibai-yanse, oyattosaa, genne, gattsui, constrastively, kagohima, gowahi, gowashi, sahikabui, sashikabui, ndamoshitan, nnma, maʔmoto, manmoto, monoga, damonga, gowasu, gozasu, gowansu, gozansu, gowasu, gowasu, gowasu, gozasu, gowasu, tesoka, tesoi, unme, genne, gennee, sankareba, sankereba, ssee, nukunaka, nunnaka, kusee, ssee, nmakunaka, nmonaka, yokareba, buchiho, hayō, hayau, wagoo, taʔ, oidon, ohantaʔ, waida, taʔ, domaa, wanchi, wagatchi, oidon, kakadon, oyaddon, hidon, anossaa, anossama, tendosa, ottohan, okkahan, warō, donyu, noyou, konoyou, sonoyou, koccha, soshiko, soshiko, doshiko, doshiko, kaʔ, kakanai, miyuru, miyuʔ, gotaru, gotaʔ, kwo-gotaʔ, kuitai, tabemasu, yansu, tamoi-yanse, kui-yanse, asubu, asuʔ, keshinu, kibaʔ, saruku, sariku, saruʔ, sariʔ, arukimawaru

-- Beland (talk) 17:38, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't that mean that language tags and transliteration are a problem on every single language-related article? For instance, French language doesn't use a single language tag, and the articles Japanese language, Korean language and Chinese language don't use the transliteration template at all. All of these just use italics. Should these be corrected as well?

Also, doesn't transliteration imply a near one-to-one mapping of a source script? What are you supposed to do when it's a romanization rather than a transliteration? — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 18:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Should be fixed now, though I'm sure I missed a few. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 20:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)