Talk:Nohs

RFV

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

Given as the plural for Noh, a traditional Japanese type of theater. Grammatically and conceptually, this strikes me as wrong, and a bit like trying to count absurdism or drama when used to mean genres. Noh, as I learned the word, is inherently uncountable.

Is this citable? And do the citations really mean "multiple Noh plays" (which is the only way I've ever heard Noh used in a plural sense)? Or was this entry perhaps auto-generated, or created by someone based on the plural form given at the Noh entry (the default if no one fills in the plural for {{en-noun}})? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this plural is used, e.g. http://www.uhpress.hawaii.edu/p-6794-9781885445971.aspx Lmaltier (talk) 20:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

...Except it isn't. If you look at the thumbnail image of the cover of the book, it says "Dramatic Representations of Filial Piety: Five Noh in Translation", without the "s".

In addition, the Google Books page uses the title without the "s", and searching the book for "nohs" reveals zero instances of use. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but it's a use of the plural, as Noh on the book, and as Nohs in the comment. This shows that the plural is used. Another use (of Nohs) : http://www1.c3-net.ne.jp/kimeikai/explanation/genji-to-heike.html Lmaltier (talk) 20:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The same applies to the word in French (nô): thae pages mentions inv, but it's wrong, e.g. see http://www.google.fr/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&hl=fr&q=%22des+n%C3%B4s+japonais%22&btnG=#hl=fr&tbo=1&tbm=bks&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22+n%C3%B4s+japonais%22&oq=%22+n%C3%B4s+japonais%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=serp.12...6323l6591l1l8127l2l2l0l0l0l0l103l194l1j1l2l0.frgbld.&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=29a4376426d55fab&biw=942&bih=548 Lmaltier (talk) 20:37, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I would classify the instance of Nohs on the U of HI web page as clearly a typo, since the web page misquotes the title of the book. Your second link is a bit more useful, but the text there is written by a non-native speaker of English, and as such seems less authoritative as a useful citation.

(The French links are interesting, but ultimately irrelevant to the question of the existence of an English plural.) -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I've found a few (two singular, two plural) citations supporting a sense of Noh = "an individual play in the Noh style"; Eirikr seems to be correct that this is the only sense that can be plural. - -sche (discuss) 21:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I think I've now cited "Nohs" as the plural of the new sense of "Noh"="a play". I've tagged that sense as countable, and the "genre" sense as uncountable. - -sche (discuss) 21:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Gah, one of your cites includes kyogens, which similarly makes my head hurt. Oh, well.

I'll edit the Nohs entry to clarify that this is only the plural for the "play" meaning and not the "genre" meaning. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Struck as passed. - -sche (discuss) 21:24, 7 June 2012 (UTC)