Is “British” instead one of the “secret”, hidden, dis-allowed synonyms on the WK hitlist? If so, then it shouldn’t have accepted the user synonym on the item page when I made it! Yes, it could potentially refer to something that is イギリス的 — British-like, but I know with 人 there it is a person. Also, what about the famous mis-quote of Paul Revere’s: “The British are coming! The British are coming!” He meant British people, not furniture, or tea!
… So… is this a bug, or one of those buzzer words?
Anyway, that’s my complaint/inquiry. Oh well. Guess the easy word is going back in the pile for a bit longer. I have lifetime, so it’s not the biggest deal.
EDIT: I meant: Is British on the synonym blacklist, and if so, why did WK accept it as a user-synonym in the first place? (Or, is this a bug? Either way, I believe this is something that should be fixed.)
I think “British” as a name for a person from the UK falls enough outside common usage to not justify it being acceptable. I haven’t ever really heard people saying “I met a British the other day”. “The British” could be okay since it’s commonly used, but it’s the same with French. You can’t really say “He’s a French” like you can with American, Italian, Finn, Russian, etc.
I don’t know about blacklisted words being accepted as user synonyms though, they shouldn’t be, but to my knowledge I’ve never been blocked from adding a synonym because it’s on a blacklist (although you should be).
You would however say “He’s British” or “He’s French.” Both are commonly used as a much quicker thing to say over “He’s a British person” or “He’s a French Person.” Or to get overly formal, “He is a French/British person.”
And I’m sorry I jumped so hard on the “but I know my Grammar!” defense. It felt a bit like an insult to my intelligence, and I lashed out. Even though you’re such a lovely person, and I should have known you didn’t mean it that way (I mean, I didn’t finish reading your post before I slammed back with a post myself! That’s a bit irrational of me… ^^;; ).
If you remember it, I would be curious to know what it was, however. As, improving my knowledge of Grammar is helpful since I write; even if I intend to break the rules, it’s nice to know that I’m breaking them when I choose to break them, so I can also follow them when I want to sound extra literary… ^_^;;;
I think the grammatical difference is that in English you’re subtly switching between adjective and noun versions without noticing.
“American” can behave as both:
“An American” and “An American person” both work.
But “British” is just an adjective, “Brit” (more historically Briton I think?) and “British Person” are both nouns.
So your examples (sorry not sure how to quote these correctly):
Adjective: “I met someone [who was] British the other day”
Adjective too: “I met a British person the other day”
Noun: “He’s an American”
Adjective: “He’s American”
And my example: Noun: “She’s a Brit.”
Personally I think it’s a good ban – if someone internalizes イギリス人 as British it will cause problems for them later on. I think it also helps not to assume there’s always a direct one-to-one relationship between an English word and its Japanese counterpart.
But agree if a user wants to override with a troublesome definition it’s ultimately their decision. It would be good if user synonyms could override shadowbans, or at least trigger a warning, if that’s the case here.
I think users here tend to lose sight of the fact that websites don’t just magically update themselves – fixes/changes needs to be prioritized, planned, potentially budgeted, designed, tested, etc.
The idea that any user-added synonyms are blocked is laughable on its face. After all, if a user wants to add “cat” as a synonym to everything, there shouldn’t be anything blocking them. Makes sense to let users take responsibility for learning and not treat them like children.