Counter meaning inconsistency

I wounder why the “counter” meanings varies from object to object?
Sometimes you have Object Counter and for others you have Counter for Objects

This is really annoying and leading to miss even if you perfectly know the word.

Some example:
〜畳 is Counter For Tatami Mats
〜把 is Counter For Bundles


〜冊 is Book Counter
〜隻 is Ship Counter

Can’t this be made consistent? Or at least adding by default the two different ways?


I imagine they’d add them if you send an email explaining it.


Good point. I’d also add “Counter of persons” to 〜人

body count :smiling_imp:


Anyway, aren’t things like 才 or 円 a counter? It is referred simply as “years old” and “money” respectively in WK.

1 Like

才 is the lazy man’s way to write 歳 - kind of a replacement. it’s “age”, not sure that counts as counter (pun intended). 円 counts yen, but… a counter, i don’t know, does it even matter?
you could say 侍7人 or 7人の侍, but you can’t say 百の円 or 7の人

I dunno there’s a bunch of inconsistencies like that. Like initially I thought I’d remember transitive verbs as “to [verb] something” because they always take a direct object, and for a while it seemed like WK agreed but then I got the occasional review wrong because it wasn’t in the list even if it’s accurate.

More consistent meaning patterns for entries would result in less frustrating bs when you type the correct answer but are marked incorrect for not phrasing it verbatim, especially when patterns seemed to be established in the system. Things like having “boy name suffix” for ~君 but not “formal name suffix” for ~様 (i added that one myself but still). This is pretty much my only gripe with this site.


In other word, one could say 才 is 歳 for young age generation.

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t really matter. But since we’re talking about consistency in this thread, I think that is worth mentioning.

歳 is listed in the dictionary as a 助数詞 (the Japanese grammar term for counter), but 円 is not. It’s a unit, I guess.


This is another example; literally: 一例 is listed as example or instance. Fine. I got a guru review wrong a while back for writing “one example” and I believe “one example” is even in one of the context sentences but sure.

I just failed a burn for 一歩 because I wrote “step” as the meaning. Zzz. A singular step is one step. The consistency doesn’t exist and it doesn’t just fall to counters, and for someone like me that doesn’t want to use an ignore script it can lead to some hair tearing.

Edit: hell in my dictionary it’s even listed as “step”.

Edit2: maybe the ancillary grammar of ほんの adds to the “oneness” of this example, but I’m salty about failing a burn for a word I know.

if that’s a counter, then 一休み is one, too - lol

1 Like

I wasn’t calling any of these counters, I’m pointing out other examples of inconsistencies in the acceptable answers provided. I don’t have a problem with 一例 only accepting “instance” and “example”, but I do have a problem with 一歩 not being accepted as “step”.

but it is a step. it’s “a step” actually. one. i wouldn’t think that makes it a counter though. :slight_smile:

Why don’t you simply add a synonym? WK will accept it as a correct answer if you do.

I think they’re aware of user synonyms, but there’s no sense in forcing everyone to add a synonym that should be there by default.


Hmm… Okay, fair enough.

It’s as Leebo said, but also, i didn’t had the synonyms when i encountered that and then months later i got it wrong at enlightened level, for example

1 Like

If you want to get to that level of pedantry, 一例 is “an example”. 1. It’s not a counter either and as I said, I wasn’t calling it a counter. It doesn’t accept “one example” or “one instance” as correct, but 一歩 does not accept “step”, only “one step”. They are inconsistent. My point was the inconsistencies between acceptable answers of similarly formed words goes much further than just counters. It’s like you’re deliberately misrepresenting what i said to make me look like an idiot.

Edit: as for user synonyms, you can’t always predict how you might provide a correct, but slightly altered, answer months in advance of getting it incorrect (ie when you go to burn an item). Whereas a lot of these mistakes could be rectified if the form of an answer was consistent across the board (ie “to (x) something” in the case of transitive verbs). So you wouldn’t be guessing if this is one of the verbs that requires the “something” or not.

I just added verb (trans) or verb (int) for every one because I got sick of it. It’s not an exact translation anyway.
Also the ignore button is a must for these kinds of frustrations imo.

why do you think i’m trying to make you look like an idiot? that’s not the case, relax :slight_smile: and you’re totally right in that 一例 is one example, it explicitely states so. 一列 is one line, and you could say 一教師, which is one teacher, not teacher, not a teacher, it’s one. 一安心 is one relief, 一休み one rest, and so on.

the issue we’re running into here is “way of expressing things”. basically the same way a german says “no cause” instead of “you’re welcome”. in japanese, “one” also means “a bit” or “short” or “for now” or “as one of”.
i think wk is sometimes a bit on the sloppy side, sometimes anal, and that’s why i couldn’t live without Override.

and to add to that, if wk was consistent, おはようございます would be written in kanji and accept “it’s early” as answer, lol.