Template talk:ja-toyo-depre

Statement comparison
Hi, please compare the following statements:

Statement 1: "In modern Japanese, 抛 (ほう) is mostly replaced by due to deprecation of Tōyō kanji Japanese script reform."

Statement 2: "In modern Japanese, 抛 is mostly replaced by when used as an affix with reading . This is due to the deprecation of non-tōyō kanji caused by the Japanese script reform."

Which statement is preferred, and can the sentence structure be improved? See, , for usage examples of this template. KevinUp (talk) 16:24, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Saying "漢語" is obviously not correct. 乱れる and 欠ける are also affected. Also by any way they are not affixes. -- Huhu9001 (talk) 16:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * These are the headwords listed in Daijirin/Daijisen: KevinUp (talk) 16:44, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 大辞林： かける【欠ける・闕ける・虧ける】
 * 大辞泉： か・ける【欠ける／×缺ける／×闕ける】
 * 大辞泉： みだ・れる【乱れる／×紊れる】
 * I'll wait for the others to reply regarding this matter. KevinUp (talk) 16:44, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm, ya, I'd be wary of being too specific. Regarding, for instance,  replaces it in the  term .  And as you note above, wago terms kakeru, midareru, and even midasu show a similar shift.
 * I'd suggest omitting the bit about the POS (the mention of affixes). The part about reading might be misleading, since the replacement does not seem to be limited to single readings.  While  was only consistently replaced in cases of reading hō, the other replaced characters seem to have had multiple reading contexts at issue.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:25, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Alright. I've replaced "when used as an affix with reading " with a more general statement "when combined with other kanji or kana". KevinUp (talk) 19:10, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Writing 乱れる instead of 紊れる is not considered replacement. The kun-readings are irrelevant to the discussion of 放 replacing 抛. I prefer the statement 1 by the way. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 23:02, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Nothing to do with 紊れる, the problem is 乱れる replaced 濫れる. Some source may say the replacement is on'yomi-only, but that is inaccurate. It affects also kun'yomi instances. -- Huhu9001 (talk) 03:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * How about the current statement?

"In modern Japanese, 抛 is mostly replaced by when combined with other kanji or kana. This is due to the deprecation of non-tōyō kanji caused by the Japanese script reform."
 * (I'd like to work more on adding content rather than modifying the same sentence over and over again). KevinUp (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know what is the point of saying "when combined with other kanji or kana"? 智(ち) is also replaced by 知 even if it stands alone. -- Huhu9001 (talk) 03:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Then why does Japanese Wikipedia have separate pages for and ? KevinUp (talk) 04:24, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

代用字とは使われている熟語にかかわらず、ある漢字を無条件で当用漢字に書き換えるものである.
 * Did you miss this statement in 同音の漢字による書きかえ?
 * -- Huhu9001 (talk) 03:37, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I've been reading the official government document on Wikisource which made no mention of it. Thank you for pointing this out from Wikipedia. KevinUp (talk) 04:24, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I see you have removed "when combined with other kanji or kana". That is fine. Can the second parameter be omitted? I think it is best not to include the kana because multiple readings are also affected, as pointed out by Eirikr above. KevinUp (talk) 04:24, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It can be used when sometimes only a single reading is affected. So it is optional. -- Huhu9001 (talk) 06:24, 23 November 2019 (UTC)