Talk:Matcha/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

See also: this page's entry on Lamest edit wars

Contents 1 Spelling discussion required 2 Spelling discussion unnecessary 3 Self-contradiction 4 Shouldn't this be "Matcha"? 4.1 Requested move 4.2 This article should be called Maccha

Spelling discussion required

It is important that a discussion of the debate around spelling be on the article so that people spelling this tea in english are aware of their options. It also will help clear up the question as to why there are the two main spellings of maccha and matcha.

207.81.142.43 05:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Newshinjitsu

Spelling discussion unnecessary

The spelling discussion takes too much space and should be edited down. All that's needed is to refer to both forms and mention which type of romanization they stem from. The discussion on the relative merits should be done in the articles about romanization of Japanese.

It is pertinent to the article though, because there is confusion as to the "correct" spelling by people who don't hold an interest in the arguments about Japanese romanisation otherwise. —Cohen the Bavarian 17:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I dissent. This little blurb is silliness. Somebody who cares about the romanization of Japanese can romanize まっちゃ however he wants to. Should we have a bloody paragraph on romanization in every single Japanese or noncognate language article? Hell, I like the romanization scheme that would call that first city we blew up back in the day "Hirosima." Should I go write a spelling paragraph? ----Mrgalt 01:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the spelling discussion is over-long and not well placed, but this last comment by MrGalt should be stricken. I am not sure what MrGalt means in this comment, but at least one obvious interpretation is highly inflammatory, and suggests that 'we' does not include Japanese people. It suggests many other things besides, but I am sure I do not need to spell these out.
The article most definitely needs expansion, including more on history, chemical make-up (many claims concerning anti-oxidants, chlorophyl, etc. are made concerning Maccha), etc.24.207.67.118 23:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I just did what I think was a pretty good job of shortening the spelling section to a single paragraph while still retaining all of the information relevant to the article, just to have my edits reverted by this account. As the spelling section is now, it contains more information than is necessary and it is written in a way which furthers a point of view, rather than just presenting the relevant facts. It exaggerates the use of the "maccha" spelling in Japan and makes the assertion that Hepburn romanization is only used to "appease" English speakers. Spacecat2 04:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm deleting the spelling section. After checking this article's history, it seems that the person who added the section in the first place basically copied and pasted it from this page, constituting copyright violation. If anyone still thinks a spelling section is needed, please make sure it doesn't violate copyright and that it properly cites sources. Spacecat2 08:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

New Shinjitsu argues that "This article should be spelled maccha ..." His argument appeared three times on this page. I'm taking the liberty to replace the redundancy with this note. Jimp 16:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Self-contradiction

I have added this template because the section on Spelling contradicts itself several times. --Purplezart 04:24, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be "Matcha"?

Taking interest in the spelling section of this article, I've made it a point to notice what spelling is used on matcha products I see in Japan. So far, I've seen three "matcha"s and only one "maccha". Can anyone give a good reason why this article shouldn't be called "Matcha"? Spacecat2 06:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

New Shinjitsu argues that "This article should be spelled maccha ..." His argument appeared three times on this page. I'm taking the liberty to replace the redundancy with this note. Jimp 16:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

This article should be called Maccha

This article should be spelled maccha for the following reasons:

1. Japanese people spell 抹茶 "maccha". This is evident by popular use. It is well laid out in the "Spelling" section.

2. "Matcha" spelling is based on the outdated "Hepburn" system. Wikipedia criticized this system in its article on the subject as distorting Japanese phonology.

3. The alphabet, as the French, Germans, Spanish, Italians, etc, would surely agree, is not for English speakers. It is to represent that countries' language. Some Japanese companies spell maccha with a tea, but they are few and marketing their product to an English speaking market.

4. The Japanese keyboard is laid out with the alphabet, rather than having a gigantic keyboard with all the different Japanese characters on it. To spell out 抹茶, one has to type m,a,c,c,h,a. m,a,t,c,h,a would like like this: まt茶 and be meaningless.

Newshinjitsu 21:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC) New Shinjitsu

Wikipedia's standard for romanization is Hepburn. If you want to change that, please argue on Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). However, please note that this is the English Wikipedia and it's meant for English speakers. If you want to argue about how French, Germans, Spanish, Italians etc should spell it, please go argue on the French, German, Spanish and Italian Wikipedias. Jpatokal 12:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

1. I just googled both spellings with the setting "Search Japanese pages". The results:

• about 57,400 Japanese pages for matcha.
• about 31,200 Japanese pages for maccha.

Looks like they also spell it matcha.

2. Since when was Hepburn outdated? I suggest you go to that article you mention and read the section where it describes how widely the system is used. Hepburn is by no means outdated, it is in fact the most widely used system of romanisation in the country.

3. No, the alphabet is not for English only. So, do tell us, what's so brilliant about maccha? If you really want to reflect the Japanese phonology & morphology, you'll be spellng it mattya (or even mattja). Maccha, it seems to me, is nothing but some bastardisation. Whether it's a bastardisation of Hepburn or of Kunrei I can't be sure ... maybe it's the bastard child of them both. No matter how many companies choose to go along with this bastardisation, we have a different standard here. The standard we use at Wikipedia, for better or worse, is Hepburn. You might complain that this is designed for English speakers but guess what ... so is this encyclopædia.

4. It is true that you can't get "抹茶" by typing matcha on a Japanese keyboard. It is true that you can do so by typing maccha. You can also type the mattya I mentioned and get "抹茶". Other alternatives include macchilya, macchixya, mattilya, mattixya, maxtutya, maxtucha, maltutya, maltsutya, maltucha, maltsucha, maxtutixya, maxtuchixya, maltutixya, maltsutixya, maltuchixya, maltsuchixya, maxtutilya, maxtuchilya, maltutilya, maltsutilya, maltuchilya and maltsuchilya. Would you argue that any of these are better than matcha? By the way, you can also type kana in directly.　Jimp 17:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed something funny. The Japanese word in New Shinjitsu's user name itself is spelled in Hepburn, not Kunrei-shiki. In Kunrei-shiki, it would be "sinzitu". Spacecat2 08:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

IT IS TRUE, MACCHA IS MORE APPROPRIATE!!!

Spelling it with the "double c" is the traditional way, and is what you will mostly find in Japanese supermarkets. The spelling with the "tc" is more common with North American companies. The debate apparently forms around the "sokuon", what linguists call a guttural stop, found in the middle of the word. The ideographs that make up maccha are matsu (ground) and cha (tea). When they are written together, the Japanese language splices them with a slight pause, known as a "sokuon". The "double c" spelling is more appropriate and it reflects the transliteration method officially recognized by the Japanese government. However, it doesn not come as naturally to English speakers. LETS put our difficulties with pronounciation aside and USE THE MORE APPROPRAITE AND TRADITIONALLY JAPANESE TERM, MACCHA, PLEASE!!!! (http://www.answers.com/topic/maccha ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.105.121.155 (talk • contribs)

Just to let you know, Answers.com cannot be regarded as a reliable source to back up anything on Wikipedia. This is because Answers.com simply copies its information from Wikipedia. As far as I'm aware the only spelling officially recognised by the Japanese government would be mattya. If you have reliable evidence to the contrary, I'm sure we'd all love to see it.

There are three commonly used standard systems of romanisation of Japanese: Hepburn, Kunrei and Nihonshiki. In Hepburn it's matcha in the other two it's mattya. The spelling maccha conforms to none of these standards. Companies are not bound to standard spellings, they can spell as they wish. They don't, however, set what is appropriate or traditional.

As Jpatokal mentions, Wikipedia uses Hepburn. If you want to have this changed, there's a place for that. If you want it changed to some other standard system, this would make some sense but I wouldn't like your chances. If you want it changed to some nonstandard system, good luck. Jimp 00:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I live in Japan, and I can tell you that "Matcha" is far more common to see at Japanese supermarkets, or at least the supermarkets I go to. And by the way, the text you quoted is from an older version of the Wikipedia article. And whoever added the text to the article in the first place copied it verbatim from an opinion piece on a tea company's website. (see "Spelling discussion unnecessary" above.)

If you want a platform for your views that badly, go start your own Macchapedia, but please leave Wikipedia alone. Spacecat2 00:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I have done more research into this matter and come up with some pretty interesting information. Unfortunately for proponents of matcha, maccha is more commonly used as it is a uniform representation of the small tsu. Hepburn used to alter this to help English speakers without making room for other small tsu applications. Therefore, as of the early 90's, Hepburn was revised once again. It was part of a Japanese government effort to standardise the romaji system and is thus taught widely in Japan and to many JSL students worldwide. All other instances of the small tsu are represented with a doubling of the constanant succeeding the vowel. The official spelling would be mattya in Kunreishiki. However, Hepburn representation such as "fu" instead of Kunrei's "hu", and shi instead of Kunrei's "si", are allowed in this system. Cha, instead of tya is also okay. Both ways are accepted. The t before the c in nicknames such as あっちゃん, which some would have spelled atchan, is uniformly spelled acchan. Matcha is a sort of remnant of Japan until the 80's. So at a JSL level, an academic level, a government level, and a popular Japanese level, maccha is the way it should be spelled (or mattya as another option from the government's perspective). It is unfortunate that this is such a contentious issue. Wikipedia, I would hope, is an environment for informing people of various perspectives. Calling the Japanese Government at 81 ３（５２５３）４１１１ to confirm this fact is always recommended. The Japanese Encyclopedia of Language is also a good source. I'm sure that Wikipedia will eventually recognize this at some point. It isn't the first time that a country has changed the way it widely represents its language in the alphabet.

Newshinjitsu 08:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Newshinjitsu

Oh for Pete's sake, Newsinzitu, is a whim on your side really worth adding a two-page long disertation into the article? I would also suggest you look up WP:WEASEL. Who are these proponents and opponents and all the rest of 'em? Can you source a serious academic debate regarding the spelling of this word? For that matter, could you state a scientific source claiming Hepburn is outdated and unjust to the Japanese language? Can you prove that people really get confused whether 'maccha' and 'matcha' are two completely different things? I would think both being green powders you buy at a tea shop would be proof enough that they are one and the same thing... Sheesh.

Actually, for starters, you could source this new romanisation system you talk about. Once the rest of us are privy to this, maybe a serious debate can ensue. TomorrowTime 11:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I studied tea ceremony in Japan, and purchased a lot of matcha while I was there. I've also purchased matcha in other countries. In addition, I've done academic research on the topic. Not once, on any commercially produced package of the tea or in any scholarly article (or, for that matter, in any article I've found written by a layperson or a tea practitioner) have I ever seen the English spelling "maccha." As for Newshinjitsu's claims, above, revised Hepburn most certainly does allow for the use of "t" in place of a doubled consonant in some words. In any case, this is an English language encyclopaedia, and English frequently employs spellings of foreign words that differ from the spelling in the original language. I'd also point out that the German, French, Romanian, Swedish, and Simple English Wikipedia articles all use the spelling "matcha." The correct spelling is m-a-t-c-h-a. Exploding Boy 04:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Just call the government and ask which is correct. If you don't speak or read Japanese, I am sure they will be able to find a translator. As for sources, an excellent one is the Encyclopedia of Japanese Language. If you want to take this discussion out of the academic arena, and to a popular level, then ask a Japanese person that has not lived abroad, how they spell maccha, and the results will probably be interesting.

I realize that this is a contentious issue. This all started because I saw what I have learned to be an error. I did not expect anybody to care. A simple correction. I understand now that there are multiple perspectives, and I am trying to add to the Wikipedia knowledge base, not replace what exists.

Let's all try to add to this article and make it really interesting. Developing knowledge and sharing ideas is what a popularly edited encyclopedia is all about. 207.81.142.43 09:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)NewShinjitsu

Incredible eagerness you display, young one. But eagerness alone not enough is.

I've been on and off Japan-related topics on wiki for about a year now, and I can tell you, most people that have responded to you on this talk page and at the Manual of Style page either speak Japanese, live in Japan and have instant access to native speakers, or both. So I would say people here know what they are talking about. Of course, there is always the possibility that you know something we don't, in which case it would be great if you could provide a link to some page discussing the topic. I'm sure most of the other guys, as also myself, would love to learn more of the romanization system you refer to.

However, I for one am not terribly convinced by your arguments. Here's one of the reasons for my suspicions:

(your addition to the article)

"Interestingly, although other Japanese words such as sake are often mispronounced as rhyming with kay, as opposed to the correct key, the spelling is not altered to make the word anglosized."

The word sake is pronounced [sa.kɛ], which would be much closer to rhyming with 'kay' than 'key'. (let's leave the issue of learning Japanese as rhyming with English words leading to terrible pronounciation of the language aside for the moment) This could, of course, be an honest mistake on your side. But if it isn't, than I'm a bit concerned regarding the exactness of anything regarding Japanese linguistics you have to say. Sorry. TomorrowTime 15:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I both speak and read Japanese. The correct way to represent a glottal stop is to double the first consonant if the syllable is in the "k", "s", "n", or "m" lines, or if the syllable is a "ta" or a "to," but to use a "t" if the syllable is in the "ch" line ("cha," "chi," "chu," "che," or "cho").

Your claims simply fail all the relevant tests: the spelling "matcha" is correct according to the rules of revised Hepburn; the far greater number of Google hits are found using the spelling "matcha"; all English-language scholarship uses the spelling "matcha"; all English-language non-academic expert writing (such as writing by senior tea practitioners) uses the spelling "matcha."

Even if you were correct, this is still the English-language Wikipedia, and as such we use the correct English spellings of foreign words, if they exist and differ from the spelling in the original language. For example, we spell 京都 and 相撲 "Kyoto" and "sumo" in English, although strictly speaking the correct romanizations would be "kyōto" and "sumō." We also have an article titled "Korea," whereas the preferred spelling according to the Korean government would be "Corea."

In any case, I've just consulted Hadamitsky and Spahn's Kanji Dictionary, the most authoritative source on such matters, and it gives the spelling m-a-t-c-h-a. The incorrect spelling "maccha" should be removed from the article. Exploding Boy 18:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and in regards to the pronuciation of certain Japanese words ending in the syllables "ke" (and "se," "te," "ne," "he," "me," "ye," "re" and "we"), the correct pronunciation in Japanese is (roughly) "~ay," not "~ey." When we speak in English we tend to pronounce words like "karaoke" (ka-ra-oh-kay) as "ka-ri-oh-key," just as we pronounce "Hiroshima" with the emphasis on the 3rd syllable in English, rather than the 2nd as is correct in Japanese. This is fine when speaking English, but not in an academic article. Exploding Boy 18:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I cleaned up the spelling debate a lot. I placed matcha on the top because it is recognised by Wikipedia. It is still relevant because, well, just call the Agency for Cultural Affairs. Call the ISO. I put their contact info in the article (is that okay, is there a way to make that better?)

Also, I added some different articles, reviews, and books to check out. I deleted my silly error on sake (DUH) I can't believe I wrote that wrong.

Anyhow, let's make it sound more professional and please, just google maccha before you delete this debate. It is relevant because people do spell it this way, even if it is less than those who spell it matcha. More than mattya anyway.

Also, help on the references. I can't figure out the code. I included the references in the Edit section and it is so far invisible on the actual article.

Newshinjitsu 09:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)NewShinjitsu

Here is an interesting online source. Look at the date. Call the Japanese government for an update on what they did. http://www.cic.sfu.ca/tqj/JapaneseStudy/romaji.html

I think it's fair to note that the word is occasionally spelled maccha, and I've added a note saying so. However, your lengthy rant about why it should be spelled that way is original research, which is not allowed, and completely offtopic for an article about a variety of powdered tea. As you can see from this Talk page, the consensus on this matter is 100% against you, so please stop reverting. Jpatokal 11:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. Let's move past this. Also, I changed the reference to Chan to Zen, because that is the English name for the movement, as well as the Japanese one. I hope that's ok. Alexwoods 14:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, let us improve on the article. Deleting information you do not agree with is very unethical. Please read it and improve it. I am curious if anyone read the Japanese Study article?

Newshinjitsu 06:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)NewShinjitsu

Also, will the person who keeps changing also to occasionally stop doing so. The correct term is also. I understand the opinion that it is not used often and that it is not correct. But that is an opinion. Also is a far more accurate word because it does not bely opinion. Encyclopedia writing is something I obviously still have a long way to improve on, but I think 84,000+ Google hits for the maccha spelling (to use thea argument that was used against me in this context) demands at least that "occasionally" is not accurate. Please stop changing that.

Newshinjitsu 08:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)NewShinjitsu

84,000 vs 1,210,000 is under 7%, so that's pretty occasional to me. But I would be fine with saying "also" instead. Jpatokal 09:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

"Occasionally" is the correct term here. "Also" implies an equal number of cases. This is incorrect. And by the way, I've just had a look at some of those "maccha" links. Several of them actually use the correct spelling "matcha." In other words, they're using "maccha" as a kind of redirect. Exploding Boy 15:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

"Occasional" would be implying that the spelling is incorrect here. "Also" does not imply the same amount of hits. If they were the same, maybe the article would be called matcha/maccha. Now that the spelling debate has been appropriately moved to its own page, I am not pushing the issue here. Can we not all call a truce and just suffer the word "also"?NewshinjitsuNewShinjitsu

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the spelling is inaccurate according to both Hepburn (matcha) and Kunrei (mattya). Jpatokal 11:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. The spelling is incorrect. And I believe we can safely call this debate over. Newshinjutsu's entire contribution history -- 5 months' worth -- has been on the issue of the spelling of this one word. It's time to move on. Exploding Boy 15:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Check out the Japanese government's table on romanisation: http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo/frame.asp?tm=20070621171031 Nowhere is tch okay. Click backa nd surf around. It shows the ん romanisation. I am looking for proof, other than google hits, that matcha is acceptable in a source that is as reliable as ISO, or Monbusho.

And please stop reversing my edits. Let us add to the knowledge, not delete it.

Newshinjitsu 08:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

You are not adding to knowledge, Newshinjitsu. You are instead boring everyone silly. (True, my inner psychopathologist is starting to find you slightly interesting, but not at all in the way that you might hope.) Read Jpatokal's comment (11:12, 7 June 2007) a short distance above. Continue reading Exploding Boy's metacomment (15:20, 7 June 2007) immediately below it. If you're really hung up on ISO romanization, I'll give you a precise URL (no nonsense "Click back nd surf around"): this one. See section 5.4 and 表2; their combination implies that what you're after is mattya. -- Hoary 10:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice Exploding Boy. However, if you check out the website I posted, that is provided by a very credible source, you will se that matcha is not mentioned. Sokuon are now only represented by a doubling of the constantant following the vowel. Cha is still acceptable, therefore the only options are maccha or mattya.

Newshinjitsu 21:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Newshinjitsu, I clicked on your link. It redirects to an uninformative page. Meanwhile, you either haven't bothered to look at or haven't bothered to digest what you have been told. Everyone here is tired of your underinformed obsession with the spelling maccha. Now run along and attend to your coursework. -- Hoary 23:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

And hey, if the "constantant" is doubled, wouldn't it be "machcha" then? Jpatokal 17:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC) (dancing the matchacha)

That's a good one, Jpatokal. Think happa, kitte, and futta. Think the common nickname Acchan. Hacchaku. These are transliterated as a doubling of the letter following the vowel. Has anyone called the Cultural Affairs Agency and asked? I understand there is little agreement here, but that would be a really good way to go for somebody.

And Hoary, quit blocking me please. I understand your frustration. Trust me, it is returned. However, let's work peacably on this. I did not add that "also spelled maccha" section. That was there for a long time before I started to learn about Wikipedia. It goes against what you know and I respect that. But there are some solid arguments for it to be there, namely ISO and Japanese government. We disagree about popularity in Japan, granted, but ask a Japanese person to write 抹茶 in rômaji. Not a good scientific approach. The scientific approach is done by the ISO and the government. The ISO is particularly concerned with both uniformity AND popular concensus.

The website I gave you is the Japanese Cultural Affairs official page. I think it is terribly organized, but that table shows what they do. Back up a page and you will have options to check out the "other rules". They mention how to transliterate ん and the sokuon.

But somebody give them a call other than me.

Newshinjitsu 09:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This is what the ISO says, straight from the poor much-beaten dead horse's mouth:

5. 4　二重子音

子音で始まる音節の前に小さな「っ」（表1-72）が来るときは、この記号はやや右寄り（横書きではやや下寄り）に書かれる。このような場合は、次に来る子音を重ねる。

　例：がっこう ＝ gakkô

...

表2 - 非口蓋化音節を表わす２連字の仮名　（原注1）

7 ちゃ チャ tya

Now I know you can't read Japanese, but if the ISO really thinks that you should spell まっちゃ as "maccha", then you should see the letter "c" or the combination "ch" in there somewhere, right? So please count how many times the letter "c" and the combination "ch" appear in the document. Here's a hint: the answers are "zero" and "zero", because according to the ISO, you're supposed to spell まっちゃ as mattya.

There is thus nothing to work on and no issue to revolve, because you are simply and unequivocally wrong. Now please drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. Jpatokal 10:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Interested parties should note that Hoary does not "keep blocking" Newshinjitsu. He blocked him once, in accordance with policy, for a 3RR violation. Note, however, that in accordance with policy, Newshinjitsu may find himself blocked again if he persists in his tendentious editing campaign regarding the spelling of the word matcha. Exploding Boy 18:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)