Talk:へ

Template:ja-usex issue

Posted on Template_talk:ja-usex#Capitalisation_and_particle_.E3.81.B8 --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

RFC discussion: April 2006–May 2007

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

へ/compare に

I guess this belongs in an appendix? Do we have sinogram particle grammar sections? --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I created that page because its content is needed on both へ and に. Is there a better place for content common to multiple entries but not common enough to warrant an entry in the template namespace? Rodasmith 23:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I think this does belong in the template namespace. I guess? --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I disagree about putting such content in the template namespace. I thought the template namespace was intended for content to include in many pages (i.e. content not strongly tied to a single entry). For content relevant to just one or two entries, the main namespace (via simple duplication or {{:entry/shared content}}) seems like better organization. Rod (A. Smith) 23:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the explanation belongs on, and should be moved to, the へ page and the に page, slightly modified for each page. The same sort of thing exists between many words in most if not all languages, and .../compare ... is not the best way to handle these explanations. In English, we have to and in, and any comparisons of one of them to the other belong on the to and in pages, not on a to/compare in page. —Stephen 07:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Stephen's response underscores exactly the confusion I had initially, and what I was talking about. Without the "Template:" prefix, it is not clear AT ALL, that the entry is not a normal entry, but rather is transcluded onto two separate pages.
• Furthermore, I agree with Stephen's conclusion; the sections themselves should be slightly different for each, therefore not commingled. --Connel MacKenzie T C 08:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Subst'ed, deleted. --Connel MacKenzie 21:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Diachronic Sound changes

I think it plausible that the particle へ (OJ: /pe/) might have been temporarily pronounced /we/ > /ye/ before becoming ModJ. /e/, considering:

• the regular loss of glides before /e/ & /i/: ゑ /we/ > /e/; 𛀁 /ye/ > /e/; ゐ /wi/ > /i/;
• particle は OJ /pa/ would eventually be pronounced /wa/ in ModJ.;
• (a) 家's kun'yomi underwent these historical sound-changes: いへ ⟨ipe₁⟩ > [...] > /iwe/ > /ie/ (modern hiragana: いえ); (b) the personal name Ieyasu was historically transcribed as Iyeyasu, thus possibly indicating an immediate /iye/ pronunciation between /iwe/ & /ie/.

So far I have not been able to locate sources to back up this hypothesis. Hopefully, somebody else will be successful. Erminwin (talk) 08:42, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@Erminwin, I believe that's pretty well established. In the Nara period, all of the modern "H" kana were probably pronounced with an initial /p-/ instead. This lenited to /f-/ by around the Heian period, and then in certain phonological contexts, to /w-/ during the Muromachi period. For え and analog へ, there was alternation then between /we/ and /ye/. You can see here in the Nippo Jisho the entry for the particle, spelled out in romaji of 1603 as Ye.

HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 05:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)