Talk:Electronic dictionary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Japan / Bibliography  (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 09:38, December 15, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Bibliography task force.
 

Proposed changes[edit]

Needs history: When were the first ones introduced? when were major changes made? How many are sold each year? Need to note that they are made for many levels and typesof users. Should perhaps mention the categories determined by makers. Should provide the Japanese term at the start, “denshi jisho” (with kanji). For various types of dictionaries (eg, kokugo, kan’wa, kogo, etc), list the major ones available and from which maker, comparing their features. I don’t think the “Most used features” list is very useful, should incorporate the information about each into a list of features and a list of dictionaries. It’s not very useful to say Kanji Dictionary “that is easy to use”: what exactly makes it easy to use? (Eg, the Kanjigen “buhin” search.) Or should note that there are big differences among jump functions. There should be more information, not just lists. Perhaps link to Henry Smith's Nov 2005 report? Jb05-Hds2 22:57, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Unnecessarily narrow[edit]

I see little reason why the article should restrict itself to covering Japanese electronic dictionaries, and not electronic dictionaries in general. These dictionaries are commonly available not only in Japan, but also in Korea and probably also in China, seeing as they often offer dictionaries to and from Chinese. While these devices may very well have been invented in Japan, is that any reason to cover only the Japanese variants? Also, the notion that the dictionaries are mainly used for translation between Japanese and Japanese seems a bit shaky, since that could be achieved without any equipment or knowledge of the language. Rōnin 20:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

It's probably too big now to be a mere section in electronic dictionary. Wikipeditor 21:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting it be made into a section in electronic dictionary, though, I'm suggesting that it be made into the article electronic dictionary. A lot of this article seems to apply directly to all kinds of Asian electronic dictionaries, and it would probably only take some minor tweaks to generalize it, given the proper sources and time. Rōnin 21:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
This makes sense to me, and I dispute the idea that they are mostly used for Japanese-Japanese work anyway. Mine has English-English, five kinds of Japanese-English, Italian, French, Korean, Spanish, and German, as well as the two types of Japanese-Japanese. There are also dictionaries made that specifically focus on Japanese-German, Japanese-French, etc. Dekimasu 01:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
As there don't seem to be a lot of people to add input and it certainly makes sense for the article to pertain to all electronic dictionaries, let's go ahead and make the switch. After all, the Japanese name for these devices translates directly as electronic dictionary. Dekimasu 12:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I'll see if I can find anything on the Korean and Chinese models... After all, I know people who have them, and there's always our friend Google. Rōnin 13:39, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah there are a ton of these in European languages as well. For instance search for "Spanish English dictionary" in the electronics section of Amazon. The title of the article seems to imply that the article won't be about just Japanese or East Asian language dictionaries.
I'm sure everyone would be perfectly happy to see that information in the article if you have it. I don't know anything about those electronic dictionaries so I didn't write about them. Dekimasu 23:35, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

In Korea, There is a electronic dictionary market that sells 1million/year. Main manufacturer are Sharp, iRiver(Dicple), Casio, AONEPRO(Vesta OEM), Nurian(divided from AONEPRO, also Vesta OEM), Canon, Seiko, Magictalkers, Atree(established by former iRiver staff) and some PMPs have specialized dictionary function. Someone fluent in both Korean and English can add some materials to this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.147.165.108 (talk) 03:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedias in Sharp models[edit]

Sharp currently has 15 models on the market in Japan. They contain features for English and Chinese translation, features designed for business, study, daily life, and travel. Several models contain the contents of Japanese encyclopedias (specifically the Encyclopedia Nipponica), as well.

The Japanese Sharp website lists two Encyclopedias used in their models: ブリタニカ国際大百科事典Quick Search Version (Britannica International Encyclopedia), and 百科事典 マイペディア (Encyclopedia "MyPedia"). There is no information about Encyclopedia Nipponica (日本大百科全書 in Japanese).

August 13 Rewrite[edit]

I have rewritten much of the article, but I haven't altered the sections on individual makers significantly. I know about my own denshijisho and general features of others, but I'm not confident in my knowledge of specific makers and models currently on the market. Previous posters here have also mentioned that the article could be broadened to include electronic dictionaries in markets outside of Japan. If this is the case, please feel free to alter my work. In either case, I hope that this is better and I would welcome feedback. Dekimasu 14:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Your nick really suits you. :D Rōnin 17:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Still Unneccessarily Narrow[edit]

It has been a year since the last topic of similar name has been discussed, and yet when I tell the browser to highlight yellow all references of "Japan" in the article, the whole thing is colored half-entirely of yellow. Perhaps one might be more lenient in the Japanese Wiki, but there are dictionaries that are entirely in English, too. Heck, I have one myself. What am I missing here? If I am ignorant of something important, then I bet that the average viewer of this page is also ignorant of the same thing, which means that the article should address that before jumping straight into this "電子辞書" stuff. --GeekOfDeath (talk) 03:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to edit the article. I only have information on the Japanese versions and have never seen one that was only in English. To the best of my knowledge, they were first built and marketed in Japan. Dekimasuよ! 05:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh ok, I thought that there was something I missed. If I find any information, I'll see if I could implement it. --GeekOfDeath (talk) 11:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
If it's of any interest, I found it very odd that this article seems (for the most part) only to refer to Japanese dictionaries. I came to the article expecting to see languages such as Italian and Spanish mentioned, as at least here in the United States they are very commonly found. And although I'm not aware of the importance, market, or extent that Japanese dictionaries have either here or there, I do think that this article should be a bit more neutral, not in the POV way, but rather it should encompass the wider concept and uses of the dictionaries. I'm fine with keeping the current information, but perhaps a separate section should be created for it, something like "Prominence/Market in Japan"? If I get some feedback on this I may work on the article a bit. D'Agosta (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Agosta thanks. Please do. There are several points here: owing to the way the article is put together it ignores several points. It fails but does imply of the popularity of electronic dictionaries in Japan. It ignores other countries. It fails to mention that the Japanese machines can only be bought in Japan. The machines by Japanese manufacturers are the only ones which display examples and not simply definitions: this is a huge advantage (try using a word that you only know its definition, without any context). Saying that, there is a Thai dictionary by Talkingdictionary that in the Thai- Japanese function (only) it does provide examples in Japanese. The Japanese manufacturers should come under the title "In Japan" and then other countries should have their own dominant dictionaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.26.173 (talk) 20:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Why is this Japan-specific?[edit]

I found this entry being part of Wiki Japan project and containing some Japanese characters. However, I don't quite understand why this entry is specifically related to Japan? Ain't it a universally known thing? --Allenchue (talk) 02:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Please ignore this post. I missed the discussion above. --Allenchue (talk) 02:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Japanese Specific, and Desktop electronic dictionaries[edit]

I agree with all comments that this article is extremely Japan biased, and see no reason why it should be part of the Wiki project Japan. The opening paragraph mentioned desk top dictionaries, these are given no further coverage, they are nevertheless electronic and included most of the important world languages. I intend to copy edit, remove its appearance of a product reference catalogue, remove POV and expand this article to include non hand held devices.Kudpung (talk) 11:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)