Talk:Daimyo

"Though the term "daimyo" literally means "great name,"......"

This part is kinda off, weird and confusing......

Though the term "daimyo" literally means "great name," the Japanese word actually comes from the kanji (characters) dai, meaning "large," and myō (shortened from myōden) meaning "name-land" or "private land.[citation needed]"

I know the kanji dai can translate to "great" or "big", but the myo part.....I think that part is off....名 by itself translates to name....where is this moden coming from?? Not to mention it kinda contridicts itself.....its it literally translates to "great name", then what with the further (incorrect) infomation??

I'm changing it. 75.72.221.172 (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

No, the contribution was correct: 大名 daimyō does in fact derive from 大名田 daimyōden, literally "great named land", referring to an owner of a large estate (as opposed to a 小名田 shōmyōden, later simply 小名田 shōmyō). 195.14.216.9 (talk) 00:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

sui lord?

Definition needed: "a generic term referring to the powerful territorial sui lords in premodern Japan". And what were they? The closest possibilities I see on the disambiguation page are still pretty far-fetched:

• Sui Dynasty of China
• Sui (surname), a transcription of two Chinese surnames
• Sui County, Henan, county in Shangqiu, Henan, China
• Sui County, Hubei, county in Suizhou, Hubei, China
• Sui (粋), an ideal in Japanese aesthetics similar to iki

Thnidu (talk) 22:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Corrected. It must be a residue of past edits.－－ Phoenix7777 (talk) 22:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Unital?

Hi, "daimyo" is in the current edition of Merriam Webster, the 11th edition. So it's considered part of Amerian English and doesn't need to be italicized. You can also see it here on its online edition. Let's update this.--A21sauce (talk) 04:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Daimyō. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090705191859/http://www.asianart.org/Samurai.htm to http://www.asianart.org/Samurai.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080531025513/http://journal.ilovephilosophy.com/Article/Samurai--Ch--333-nin-and-the-Bakufu--Between-Cultures-of-Frivolity-and-Frugality-/2254 to http://journal.ilovephilosophy.com/Article/Samurai--Ch--333-nin-and-the-Bakufu--Between-Cultures-of-Frivolity-and-Frugality-/2254

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 7 February 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 09:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

---

Daimyō → Daimyo – In 2008, User @Fg2 correctly noted that "Daimyo" (without the macron) is an accepted English term and moved this article from Daimyō to Daimyo. In 2016, with no explanation, user @Gryffindor moved it back. "Daimyo" (no macron, no italics) is the correct title for this article, just as Tokyo does not take macrons. See: the manual of style for Japanese terms, which specifically says that accepted English terms should be spelled as in English, even if this differs from Japanese: [1] For dictionary references, see: [2], [3], etc. In addition, only transliterated terms should be italicized. "Daimyo" is not transliterated; it is an accepted English term. Bueller 007 (talk) 21:17, 7 February 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Jerm (talk) 16:42, 15 February 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 21:44, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Oppose: Claims that this or that is an "English word" need very clear evidence. Of course Daimyo, written with or without a macron, will appear in lots of writing in English, but this does not make it an "English word", any more than "tagliatelle", "Tokyo", or "tovarich" are actually "English words". Writing with the macron is no obstacle to ignorant readers, who can ignore it, so you simply want to reduce the amount of information Wikipedia provides, which I think is a bad idea. Imaginatorium (talk) 03:34, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

It's really quite a feat to not be able to make it through such a short paragraph as the one I wrote. The Japanese manual of style, which I linked above, specifically says that English words of Japanese origin (like "daimyo") should be spelled as accepted in English. And then I provided English dictionary references that show it without the macron."Follow the usage of academic texts or a widely used reference such as a published encyclopedia in matters of spelling, macron usage, and name order." (Emphasis mine.) It also Here's Britannica: [4] Again, no macron. But your argument completely flies in the face of the manual of style and all English dictionaries and encyclopedias, so that's cool. P.S., "tagliatelle" is an English word of Italian origin, just as "daimyo" is an English word of Japanese origin. Your example, like your argument, is nonsense. Bueller 007 (talk) 02:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose - just make the version without the macron a redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.193.250 (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

• Support - The relevant policy here is WP: COMMONNAME. Bueller 007 is completely right. All other encyclopedias and dictionaries drop the macron, and there's no reason to make Wikipedia the big exception to the rule. I agree also that daimyo should not be italicized, since it's a word used very often in English language articles and books without italicization. Patiodweller (talk) 13:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

• Support: Nevermind dictionaries, even specialized sources on Japanese history leave out the macron. Check the authoritative Cambridge History of Japan. Like has already been said, "no macron, no italics". The oppose voters need to explain why Wikipedia shouldn't have the same standards as the Cambridge History of Japan. Tikisim (talk) 03:19, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
• Support. Every style guide I am familiar with recommends following the spelling given in a widely available dictionary. See Merriam-Webster, American Heritage, and Oxford. To clarify a point raised above, the Japanese themselves rarely use macrons, as you can see here. Macrons come from a transliteration system called modified Hepburn. Colin Gerhard (talk) 08:44, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
• Support What Bueller 007 said.Polyglot Researcher (talk) 08:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC) — Polyglot Researcher (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Support - For reasons mentioned by proposer. --Veikk0.ma 21:13, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose completely wrong reasoning in proposal and support votes. We have the capability here to show the difference between long vowels and short vowels and citing crap sources which don't doesn't change Wikipedia which does. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:03, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment. The common name in English appears to be the one without a macron. The one with it is more Japanese. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 17:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

• Support per nom and abundant sources. Note re Bueller 007, "Tokyo" is indeed an English word; the strict Modified Hepburn romanization of the Japanese name of the city is Tōkyō, but not used due to being just Tokyo in English. SnowFire (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2020 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not an English word

It's not an English word of Japanese origin, like "samurai", "ninja", "sumo", or "Tokyo"; it's a romanized Japanese word being used in English. The move was a mistake and a joke. The article still uses italics for the word, indicating it is a strictly non-English word, as it should. 108.34.149.124 (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Please then, kindly explain why it is included in so many English book titles and book content, and in so many scholarly references in English, including hits on Google scholar. Netherzone (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC)