Talk:대나무

Etymology

Discussion moved from User talk:Suzukaze-c.

Source: https://kin.naver.com/qna/detail.nhn?d1id=11&dirId=1116&docId=51792663&qb=64yA64KY66y0IOyWtOybkA==&enc=utf8&section=kin&rank=1&search_sort=0&spq=0&pid=UKJg6dpVuFRssZ4TtVNssssss4Z-385125&sid=5aHrlwAFcVvhtIVsumWCNA%3D%3D

The root of bamboo is ...

Bamboo is called zhu in Chinese character. When the bamboo was moved to the north, the name came along with the Chinese southern sound.

The southern pronunciation of '竹' is 'tek'(Minnan), but the 'k' sound is weakened. In Korea, it changed into 'Dae'. In Japan, it was divided into two syllables and became 'Take'. What do you think? I think it is very plausible. :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))) — This unsigned comment was added by B2V22BHARAT (talk • contribs).

1. Knowledge IN is not a reliable source.nvm, the answer was quoted from an encyclopedia

2. The 日本国語大辞典 declares that 竹 (take, “bamboo”) is related to 高 (taka) and 丈 (take). This website says that there are many theories for 竹 (take, “bamboo”). One of them is that 竹 (take, “bamboo”) came from 태 (tae)대 (dae), which directly contradicts your link.

3. The Sino-Japanese reading of 竹 is already 'tiku'. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 21:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 02:35, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

1. https://kin.naver.com/qna/detail.nhn?d1id=11&dirId=1116&docId=51792663&qb=64yA64KY66y0IOyWtOybkA==&enc=utf8&section=kin&rank=1&search_sort=0&spq=0&pid=UKJg6dpVuFRssZ4TtVNssssss4Z-385125&sid=5aHrlwAFcVvhtIVsumWCNA%3D%3D Look carefully. The source came from Doosan world encyclopedia, not from a personal opinion. Knowledge IN is like a QUORA. They sometimes help.

2. That's why I put 'perhaps' in front. 태(Tae), 대(Dae), 재(Zae) They are used interchangeably, just like Zeus is also written Dia or Theos.

3. I don't know what you're talking about. 竹 'alone' is pronounced 'take'. I lived in Japan for 5 years.

4. Please refrain from using derogatory words, such as:

a) mm, do you have any sources for this? and the formatting is ugly as well

b) rm atrocious presentation

Thank you. — This unsigned comment was added by B2V22BHARAT (talk • contribs) at 02:46, 6 May 2019 (UTC).

For 3, I don't know if you noticed the Sino-Japanese part: Sino-Japanese=on-yomi. Applying the palatalization that happens before "i", tiku becomes chiku, which is what we have for both kan-on and go-on. Seems pretty straightforward to me. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:44, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

竹 (zhú) in Korea was first attested in the "Gyerim Yusa" 계림유사 (gyerimyusa), 1103, as 帶／带 (dài) 대 (dae), not 태 (tae). Also attested in the Gugeupbang eonhae (救急方諺解 / 구급방언해), 1466, as 대 (dae)+나모 (namo), not 태 (tae)+나모 (namo). B2V22BHARAT (talk) 04:31, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

1. Yes, my apologies.

2. Indeed, but I still judged that it was farfetched.

3. See Chuck Entz's reply.

4. {{zh-pron}} and {{ja-readings}} were not designed for inline use in text, and I must say that it does not look good.

(5.) 태 (tae) is a typo. Could you add this information to 대 (dae)? It would be helpful.

—Suzukaze-c◇◇ 22:16, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

2. Well, the source came from Doosan world encyclopedia, so it wasn't my opinion. I was told to refrain from adding too much external web links to dictionary entries by KevinUp, so I had to put it concisely.

3. 대나무 (daenamu) is a Sino-Korean word, so we should look at Korean etymology of 대나무 (daenamu), not Japanese etymology of 대나무 (daenamu). @Chuck Entz.

5. I think you explained it well in 대 (dae) page already.

B2V22BHARAT (talk) 23:49, 6 May 2019 (UTC)