Ups, I overwrote it
I mean it doesn’t accept まいがつ as a valid spelling. If it’s due to the “げつ if the answer isn’t a number” rule, then it shouldn’t say both are correct in the description.
Ups, I overwrote it
I mean it doesn’t accept まいがつ as a valid spelling. If it’s due to the “げつ if the answer isn’t a number” rule, then it shouldn’t say both are correct in the description.
Both onyomi まい + げつ, in contrast to onyomi and kunyomi まい + つき. As I understand, the description is correct.
Is there really no rule that you change the second character a bit if they are to be read together? There are plenty of cases of this like さとごころ or きょうだい. Or is it an exception thing. I guess it might be this “to do with numbers” thing. That’s why there no change in さんせい or しかく.
“But it can be read まいげつ using both on’yomi readings too.”
It evidently means both on’yomi readings (plural)
That’s something different, called rendaku (and きょうだい isn’t an example of rendaku, btw). Having a different reading and having rendaku are different concepts.
Yeah, I’m not saying there are multiple readings, I’m just trying to find a rule for when there’s a change in on’yomi when used with another and when there isn’t.
Okay… it’s kind of hard to keep track of what you’re asking about, because the original topic of the thread is about the wording of the description (which is correct, but I can see why it was confusing to you).
Then you started to ask about which reading to choose when a kanji has multiple possible readings.
And now you’re asking about rendaku.
So what’s this rendaku thing? And how is it different from what I described?
Rendaku is like when こころ becomes ごころ when it follows something else. The “ren” in rendaku refers to the “continuation” part (it has to follow something else) and the “daku” part of rendaku refers to the change from こ to ご or た to だ, etc.
So some readings that don’t have those dots, get them when they follow something else.
Other readings always have the dots no matter what, and so we don’t say it’s rendaku for those.
I disagree, it clearly says both on’yomi readings are acceptable, not that both kun’yomi and one of the on’yomi, but whatever
No, it says that there are two options まいつき (which is onyomi + kunyomi) and まいげつ (which is onyomi + onyomi) and either are acceptable.
So there’s no rule for why it happens in さとごころ but not in さんせい?
There are rules of thumb, sure. But it’s not related to this thread’s questions.
Or are さん and せい treated as separate words?
Ok, I shouldn’t mix the topics, sorry about that
Well, the wording of “using both on’yomi readings too” clearly suggests the other option. Try writing “both the on’yomi reading too” (singular, not plural)
Or even better without “both”
But まい and げつ are both onyomi readings… That’s what the both refers to.
Like I said, I get why you were confused. And I don’t disagree that it could be reworded, but it isn’t incorrect technically.
I guess it’s not that important at this point though.
Ah, ok, I see what you mean, yeah I didn’t even consider that’s what it meant
Then it should probably be “using the on’yomi readings of both” in that case