Talk:Hoichi the Earless

Requested move

Article was initially created with an awkward and obscure translation of the Japanese name, and then a redirect page was created with the more common and appropriate name shortly afterwards. I have never seen the name "Earless Hoichi" used outside this Wikipedia article, but Kwaidan: Stories and Studies of Strange Things (the main source for the myth), Kwaidan (film) and The Dream of a Summer Day all use "Hoichi the Earless" (although the second only in subtitle, of course). elvenscout742 01:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

---

• Support. elvenscout742 01:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. waka 09:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
• Support - based on discussion below, and that H the E is 10x more common on .edu sites. Rd232 ^talk 23:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. Dragons flight 05:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

Hearn's original text does translate "Mimi-nashi Hoichi" as "Hoichi the Earless," but only at the very end of the story. The main title of his work is THE STORY OF MIMI-NASHI-HÔÏCHI. However, I think that Hearn's translation is a little dated, and "Earless Hoichi" is a better rendering of the name in modern English. The form <aspect adjective> <title> is still commonly used in Japanese, but it's usually translated as "<aspect adjective> <title>" rather than "<title> the <aspect adjective>" because the latter usage is uncommon in modern English. For example, we could translate 欲張りおじいさん (yokubari ojiisan) as "Old Man The Greedy," but "greedy old man" would be much more natural. Though there is some precedent for translating "Mimi-nashi Hoichi" as "Hoichi the Earless," I've also seen it written as Earless Hoichi (here, here, and here, for example), so I don't think that the translation is particularly clumsy. Given that the article under either name will require redirects (both translations must point at the content one way or another), I think that the existing page and its associated redirects are more than sufficient. --waka 09:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, the fact is that even if Hearn's translation is still the most prominent English source on the story. Indeed, the first of the three Internet sources you quote includes his translation with "Hoichi-the-Earless" and only says "Earless Hoichi" in the introduction. The third is a Japanese-language site and therefore the English translation is just a translation, not a proper rendition in good English (it calls Hearn "Yakumo Koizumi", which is not correct by any standard). "<PERSONAL NAME> the <TITLE>" works just fine in modern English (Alexander the Great and Theodoric the Great, for example). Besides, current translation trends do not matter, as the character has an English language name as given him by a fine writer over a century ago. The character's name is "Hoichi the Earless".A Google search will reveal that most Internet sources that use "Earless Hoichi" are either English translations of Japanese sites (probably by native Japanese unfamiliar with Hearn's reputable English version) or informal discussions of either Kobayashi's film or Hearn's book, both of which officially support the "Hoichi the Earless" stance.

Okay, this looks like it could lead to problems, as neither of us will give up our claims and few other Wikipedians will understand or join in. Can you think of any way to resolve this, being one of the only two people I informed of this movement? (The other, User:Jefu, apparently only editted this article because of an interest Wikipedia's naming conventions on Japanese Emperors.) elvenscout742 21:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

While I totally see your point, I think that renaming the page will do little to increase the quality of the content. As I mentioned before, both translations are applicable and thus redirects will be required either way. As of right now, searching Wikipedia for either translation will bring you to the correct page, which I believe is the most important aspect of the name. I think we've made our points, but I would like to point out that we have already changed Hearn's original words because they are dated; we've discarded the dated romanization scheme he used by referring to this work as "Hoichi the Earless" rather than "Hôïchi-the-Earless." My point is that the name of this story is 耳なし芳一, and that any translation into English is just that: a translation. I don't think we should tie the content to any specific translation, which is why I don't feel that renaming the page is particularly useful. --waka 21:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

If it doesn't make much difference either way (and I don't think it does) there's no reason not to respect the Wikipedia convention of using the most established English usage. Rd232 ^talk 23:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

That's fine with me as long as the existing Hoichi the Earless redirects are replaced by similar Earless Hoichi redirects. My main concern is that people unfamiliar with the dated translation used by Hearn and others will have trouble finding the page if they know the Japanese name. As long as both names point at the content, I don't really care what it says at the top of the page. And I think there is probably a legit point about the precedence of the Hearn translation; I'm probably warped because I read this story in Japanese long before I found it in English.--waka 07:03, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Dated Romanization Scheme

Please don't change all instances of "Hoichi" to "Höichi" or "Höîchi" or "Hōichi" or any of the other possible renderings using out-of-date romanization systems. Japanese romanization rules are quite clear and common now, and there's no reason to use an older scheme to write Hoichi's name in the article (except for the title of the page, I guess, but in that case it's the exact name of a work rather than just common text, and even then it's not exactly what Hearn titled his initial translation). Thanks. --waka (talk) 00:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)#Romanization. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 05:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Requested move to Hoichi the Earless

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per discussion. This was a lot to read and understand, but I believe we've established that there is a common spelling in reliable English-language sources, and that it is macronless. - GTBacchus^(talk) 01:01, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

---

Hōichi the Earless → Hoichi the Earless – Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC) The non-macron title has become common among English literature when referencing this story.

• Opening statement of MOS:JP states "An English loan word or place name of Japanese origin should be used in its most common English form in the body of an article, even if it is pronounced or spelled differently from the properly romanized Japanese; that is, use Mount Fuji, Tokyo, jujutsu, and shogi, instead of Fuji-san, Tōkyō, jūjutsu, and shōgi."
• MOS:FOREIGN states, "The use of diacritics (accent marks) on foreign words is neither encouraged nor discouraged; their usage depends on whether they appear in verifiable reliable sources in English and on the constraints imposed by specialized Wikipedia guidelines."
• WP:COMMONNAME states, "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it instead uses the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources."

Books Google show 435 books using "Hoichi",[1] compared to only 1 using the macron name.[2] Jappalang (talk) 12:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Nominator clearly demonstrates that the non-macron title is the most common name in English sources. Jenks24 (talk) 16:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. No obvious need to use macrons in the English-language version. --DAJF (talk) 22:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
• Strong oppose per our adoption of Hepburn romanization. If we use search results for this with or without macron matter, all Japan-related articles would be macronless. Tokyo, Osaka, and Judo are widely known in the world, but not this story. How could readers who don't know ja distinguish long vowels from short vowels? If you transliterate Hoich into ja without knowing the personal name, it would be ほいち. I want to provide the correct information to readers. Oda Mari (talk) 06:59, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Comment: If the first line of the intro were written as "Hoichi the Earless (耳なし芳一, Mimi-nashi Hōichi)", I think it would be pretty clear to all readers that "Hoichi" is written with a long "o" in Japanese, just as we write "Ichiro Suzuki (鈴木 一朗, Suzuki Ichirō)" for that Japanese baseballer's article. --DAJF (talk) 00:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I knew. But I think using macrons in the first line of the intro is not noticeable enough. The reason that macroned words are fewer is it's difficult or tiresome to type or not following romanization correctly. If we use revised Hepburn romanization, I'd like to use it precisely. Oda Mari (talk) 09:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Where is the policy that dictates us to use Hepburn romanized words? As far as I know, all established rules (as stated above) tell us not to use macron words if there is an English common name, which exists (see the above literature searches). Jappalang (talk) 08:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Here. Unlike Judo, I don't think Hoichi is an en common word. It is not in en dictionaries. Oda Mari (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

You are overlooking the over-riding guide on that page itself, the very first opening line as pointed out above, that "An English loan word ... should be used in its most common English form in the body of an article, even if it is pronounced or spelled differently from the properly romanized Japanese", in that sub-section you raised "Japanese terms should be romanized according to common usage in English-language reliable sources as indicated by policy, including unconventional romanization of titles and names by licensees" and in the main guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English): "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works)." We refer to English sources that discuss the subject and they (to state again, since you seem to be ignoring this) use "Hoichi the Earless", so where are the multitude of sources that use the macron form to discuss the subject? Jappalang (talk) 16:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't understand. As far as I know, Hōichi is neither an English loan word nor a place name. As for the with/without macron matter, there has been many discussions. Here is a major thread. Oda Mari (talk) 07:41, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Please read the rules/policies/guidelines about naming articles. Pay attention to the Request move template above, particularly "Remember to base arguments on article title policy". Those policies ask us to use English common names (as used by most reliable sources) instead of romanized forms. So I ask again which specific article title policy dictates us to ignore English common names (be they loan words or foreign creations) in favor of a romanized form that no (or relatively fewer) sources use at all? Jappalang (talk) 08:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Also again, 435 books use "Hoichi"[3] in their discussions of the subject (the story), calling it "Hoichi the Earless" and calling the protagonist "Hoichi", compared to only 1 using the macron name.[4] Jappalang (talk) 08:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

As you could see if you actually read those threads, there is a long and unresolved debate on whether the policy is "use macronless spellings for words that are common in English" (meaning that macrons are used by default, unless you can find the word in an English dictionary), or "use macrons only if they are more common in English" (in which case macrons would virtually never be used, since for any given Japanese word you'll find more macronless than macronful renderings of it on the Net). It's fairly clear that the original intent was the former, and I believe this remains the consensus, but the other side certainly has its proponents as well. The situation is particularly unclear for proper nouns like H{ō,o}ichi, which you can't just look up in a dictionary; for these, the consensus is edging more towards not using macrons.

All that said, since "Hoichi the Earless" is obviously already quite anglicized, I see no harm in dropping the macron in this particular instance. Jpatokal (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment. Is google books enough? I easily found out some Kwaidan by Hearn using Hōichi at amazon.com. e.g. Hōichi is used in this book, but google serach cannot find out the book in google books.

• Hōichi - [5][6][7][8][9]
• Hoichi - [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]
• Hôichi - [19]

--Mujaki (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

"Google serach cannot find out the book in google books" is untrue. Hearn's Kwaidan: Stories and Studies of Strange Things is the very first entry in the Google search I pointed above (repeated link). Your own search through Amazon also shows that the non-macron name is used more than the macron version. "Hoichi the Earless" remains the commonly used name for the subject. Jappalang (talk) 00:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Did you read each book you pointed? I thought google serach (books) cannot find out many books using "hōichi, even if they exists. But google search seems to hit "hōichi" and so on as "hoichi". The first ten entries for "hoichi" are the following:

• Hōichi(4) - [20][21][22][23]
• Hoichi(4) - [24][25][26][27]
• Hôichi(2) - [28][29]

In short, the result shown by google serach with the keyword "hochi" is not enough because many books using "Hōichi" and so on is included in them.

And the macronless name "Kochi" and "Hyogo" were not supported on the former discussion in enwp, even if they were in the overwhelming majority. So, I guess the macron style (revised Hepburn) has priority over the other style if macron and macronless appear in a ratio of 1 to 2. --Mujaki (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

You have a few links mixed up above, but I see your point. It would be remiss of me not to investigate further, so I looked at all the books that can be previewed in any manner. Summary of findings:

• Preview material = 142
• "Hoichi" in title (no macrons) = 96
• "Hoichi" in title (in any macron form) = 46

The no macron form outnumbers the macron form by twice the number (the opposite of your assertion).

I further investigated on JSTOR. Of the academic sources there...

• Larry Danielson's Folklore and Film: Some Thoughts on Baughman Z500-599 puts "Kwaidan" in italics, puts diacritics on foreign names, yet names "Hoichi the Earless" in plain form. The same for Alan L. Miller's Myth and Gender in Japanese Shamanism: The "Itako" of Tohoku. So does James R. Brandon in Asian Theatre Journal Also Beong-Cheon Yu in Lafcadio Hearn's Twice-Told Legends Reconsidered
• Program of the Ninety-Eighth Annual Meeting. University of Texas, Austin Texas, April 4-6, 2002 names it in plain form, even though foreign terms are in italics. Linda Ehrlich and Ning Ma does so as well for their article in Journal of Film and Video
• The only hit for talking about Hoichi purely in diacritic form is George Hughes's An Irish Version of Lafcadio Hearn, which does not even use the "Hoichi the Earless" form but the Japanese Miminashi Hoïchi.

It seems JSTOR material favors the non-macron form as well.

As for the prefecture discussion ("Kochi" and "Hyogo"), that took place in 2006, way before MOS:JP has started to get strict in Romanization.[30] Things have changed. Jappalang (talk) 08:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Support An article title should be typeable to make it as easy as possible to find the article. No one types a macron into a search engine. There is no problem finding the article now, but that's because it's "Hoichi" inside the text. That's backwards. The title should be for the widest audience, while the text is for those who have greater interest. Kauffner (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

HK film

There's a HK film "Hex 邪" (1980) that took from "Hoichi the Earless" ideal. Worth mentioning?

2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:F9FB:7822:6AEA:A659 (talk)Ted2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:F9FB:7822:6AEA:A659 (talk) 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:F9FB:7822:6AEA:A659 (talk) 11:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)