Talk:Engrish/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Misc comments

'Engrish' is NOT a "pun"!!!!

Babel Fish: refers to the tower of, or to the HHGG type
Babelfish: refers to the altavista service

...The Tower of Babel Fish? The fish in HHGG were named after the tower of Babel. Just Babel.

The HHGG idea, I'm sure, came simply from the verb to babble.

New paragraph

Stevertigo's added paragraph seems to be about something completely different from the rest of the article (although I don't understand what it is about), and it makes the article sound incoherent. (Sorry, Stevertigo!) Please could someone who understands the paragraph reword it in some way? Thanks! -- Oliver P. 03:41 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

No rewording needed, but I stretched it out a little with some non-oriental examples of the same thing. Ortolan88

I am with Oliver P. I don't understand what this recent addition has to do with the article at all. This new text should be moved to an article where it makes sense. RK

Nonsense! -豎眩

Try this. Engrish happens:

1. When people who speak an oriental language but not English simply make a mistake.
2. When people who speak English make jokes about oriental people.
3. When oriental people adopt English words to oriental pronunciation.
4. When oriental people deliberately distort English for an amusing effect

All of these are covered in the article. The last case is the disputed paragraph. I do not understand why, particularly with the addition of the Mötley Crüe example, this point is not clear. Ortolan88

As I understand it - Engrish is a term reserved for the advertising aspect, any other use is tertiary.. -- 豎眩

There is no bureau of slang deciding what terms are reserved for what meanings. All of the uses I mentioned are common, all are in the article. Do I have to defend your contribution from attack by you too? Ortolan88

"bureau of slang"  :]-豎眩

---

I think an entry I made on Talk:Chinglish needs to be read by participants in this argument as well. -- Michael 14:09 19 May 2003 (UTC)

---

Isn't Engrish really just another word for Japlish? I was under the impression that Engrish was a dedicated term rather like Franglais and Chinglish, Singlish and others. For example, I wouldn't call the frequently amusing mistakes people make in western countries "Engrish", whereas funny English in Japan is definitely Engrish... Comments? Exploding Boy 01:12, Feb 1, 2004 (UTC)

Yes-- not really Engrish

Simple grammatical errors, typos, and things like that are not really Engrish-- the term means more than that (or less, depending). It has to be either entirely nonsensical or at least difficult to understand; you can't call something like "You are a Turks!" (FFVII) Engrish. That's just a small mistake, and it's not even funny. The sweater cited at the top is a good example. There should be more of that and a LOT less of the dinky kind, because people are going to come here to learn about Engrish and then start using it incorrectly! ~" 'I went to store'? It's supposed to be 'I went to THE store'! HAHAHA ENGRISH, OH MAN!!!"~ ~~we certainly don't want this happening.~~

Not Engrish?

there are a few examples in the article I wouldn't personally consider Engrish - removed one earlier that definitely wasn't, but I'll leave these open for now:

• FFVII - seems to me more like a rushed translation/edit job than genuine Engrish. eg. "He went walked to the west" was probably the result of someone typing "went" or "walked", deciding the other sounds better and adding it while forgetting to remove the first. similarly the famous example "This guy are sick" could have resulted from someone translating without context reading it as "These guys are sick" (due to lack of plurals in Japanese) then changing it on realising it refered to one guy, while missing the "are". these kinds of mistakes are very easy to make when you're rushing something, even if your English is perfect.
• Megaman X6 - Sigma is damaged at this point, it's entirely intentional

Distraction 01:26, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that that's probably the cause. The game shows other signs of being rushed anyway. Speaking of FF7, I think one of the examples is a bit off, but I don't want to change anything because I don't have access to the original Japanese game and I could be wrong. "Attack when it's tail's up" is said to be a mis-translation of "Don't attack when it's tail's up." In fact, the full line in the game is given in two parts, "Attack when it's tail's up/it's gonna counter-attack with it's lasor" (paraphrased from memory). The error isn't in the actual grammar/spelling, it's just broken up badly in-game -- this line appears when the tail is up, so people who don't know better see the first half and attack right away.

Here's one from the article that perplexes me: "Although it is small, it is very courageous. It will take on a larger Skarmory on an equal footing. However, its will weakens if it becomes hungry." What's wrong with this? I don't see any problem with the grammar here.

Is the suggestion that the final sentence should read, "it will weaken"? That's not right, at least not the way I understand the Taillow article (someone who's actually played the game will have to verify).

If it loses hitpoints when it gets hungry, then "it will weaken." If, on the other hand, getting hungry means it isn't brave enough to fight larger Skarmory, then "its will weakens."

It doesn't become Engrish just because some English-speaking person has a poor grasp of his or her native tongue.

LUH 3417 16:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it appears that "will" refers to "willpower" and not the verb (i.e., "going to"). Get rid of it. —Ragdoll 14:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

bite the wax tadpole

Doesn't "bite the wax tadpole" come from translating the opposite way from Engrish? Kingturtle 09:32, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, it came about when Coca-Cola tried to market iself in China; it found some characters that resembled the pronunciation of Coca-Cola, but the particular combination they chose, aside from being quite off pronunciation-wise, was a nonsense phrase that could be interpreted as "bite the wax tadpole". They later hired some firm to look through thousands of kanji and come up with a phrase that both meant something pleasing and sounded like Coca-Cola; the phrase they came up with, the one used today, can be roughly interpreted as "pleasure in the mouth." GusGus 22:22, 2004 Mar 4 (UTC)

Depending on the dialect, "ke-kou-ke-la" could also be interpreted as "female horse fastened with wax" or "wax-flattened mare" in addition to "bite the wax tadpole." --162.83.227.101 22:11, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The urban myth has been debunked. [1]--Tokek 12:44, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Stick with English and not Latin: Mirth in the mouth. Mouthey mirth. -lysdexia 03:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Lexical borrowing or Engrish

I disagree that "puroresu" is an example of Engrish. It's a contraction of a lexical borrowing from English. There are many of these in Japanese. The Japanese will borrow English terms for things they don't already have names for (examples: word processor, television), but frequently due to Japanese restrictions on consonant clusters the borrowing ends up long and unweildy (waarudo purosessaa, terebijion), so they coin short contractions or abbreviations (wapuro, terebi). These are legitimate Japanese words that happen to derive from English. Technically, they're not speaking English at all, any more than somebody who says "ex post facto" is speaking Latin. It's not at all the same thing as spelling "lady" as "rady" because you can't tell the difference. - Gwalla 23:34, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)

finally, somebody who can actually respect a foreign language for what it is - foreign. i've been through this exact debate with native english speakers so many times it makes me sick. what a lot of people don't seem to understand is that once a certain word, such as some of the examples you mentioned above, enters a foreign language, it doesn't neceseraly have to conform to the logic of the original language anymore. calling such words (i.e. wapuro, manshon, "training pants" and others) "mangled english" is no more pompous rubbish than implying, for instance, that "mutton" is an example of how the brittish and americans are misusing and mispronouncing the french language. i bow to you, gwalla. keep fighting the good fight.

Some are adapations, and some are not; "ex post facto" is /still/ Latin. The good fight is the wrong fiht, and one cannot keep ae abstract noun (fighting). If only you knew what infinitivs or progressivs are. -lysdexia 04:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

What is Engrish?

I agree with Exploding Boy ... I think "Engrish" refers to "Japanese English" most of the time, English as used in Asia at its most general (drawing on the old "Asia and R vs. L" issue). It seems like the "Engrish" page as it is now is redundant considering a Non-native pronunciations of English page already exists. It would be nice to have a page with more concrete examples of Japanese English like there is on the Japanese language page for Engrish.

There is debate in Japan too as to what is "Engrish", or waseieigo (和製英語: literally "English made in Japan") ... the Japanese version of the Engrish site divides it into 4 sections:

• "English" words created in Japan: Guts pose, salaryman, plus alpha, etc.
• English words given a new meaning: sign ("autograph"), mansion ("apartment"), etc.
• Shortened words: infura (infrastructure), infure (inflation), etc.
• Words borrowed/created from other languages: abekku (French avec), arubaito (German Arbeit), etc.

It seems like the "Engrish" page should deal exclusively with these types of Japanese-English words and phrases ... and leave the generalities to the Non-native pronunciations of English page ... but what does everyone else think? CES 05:37, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I don't consider any of those to be Engrish. In my experience, Engrish refers to Japanese misuse of English (not gairaigo borrowings like "manshon", or gairaigo-derived coinages like "infura" or "salaryman"). This includes non-native pronunciation (but more often misspellings based on non-native pronunciation, such as the word "Engrish" itself) and also ungramatical or just incoherent phrasing like "The sentimental taste is cozy for the heroine's [sic] in the town." and "Water feeling powder is in the center of the white candy." Most examples I've seen are of the latter type (strange phrasing) rather than the former (mispronunciation or misspelling). It's any mangled use of English (as English) produced by Asians (usually Japanese) that is strikingly wrong or odd to native speakers. It's usually from Japanese product packaging or advertising copy—spoken English is rarely considered "Engrish" no matter how mispronounced or grammatically incorrect. — Gwalla | Talk 02:06, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ok ... I follow your thinking (although I would debate your point that calling an apartment a "mansion" or inflation "infure" is not "strikingly wrong or odd" to a native speaker). Looking at the other -ish pages (Singlish, Konglish, Spanglish, etc.) there appears to be a wide range of definitions for Engrish. I would personally be leary about an article concerning "any mangled use of English (as English) produced by Asians (usually Japanese) that is strikingly wrong or odd to native speakers", given the subjective nature of that definition. Looking at it from just the perspective of Japan (as I'm sure most people would agree is the "target" for Engrish), the article as is lumps three very distinct phenomena together: 1. Bad translation from Japanese to English (All your base is belong to us) 2. Non-native pronunciation of English (Eric Crapton) and 3. English assimilated (correctly or incorrectly) into Japanese ("mansion" to mean apartment, etc.). Maybe all this article needs is a more specific definition of "Engrish" and a little better organization. CES 04:20, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"Manshon" and "infure" do sound odd to native speakers of English, but the difference is that they aren't English! They're Japanese words (derived from English ones), used in Japanese writing and speech. Japanese speakers who say them do not—in most cases—think that they are speaking English at the time. Engrish is the result of failed attempts to speak English. I would consider your #1 to be a type of Engrish, #2 to be borderline, and #3 to be not Engrish at all. Saying "manshon" in Japanese conversation is not bad English, any more than saying "beef" in English conversation is bad French (yes, "beef" is a lexical borrowing from French). — Gwalla | Talk 05:28, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

What you say makes sense ... however, it also contradicts the definition given in the article. But, giving it more thought, I agree with your definition of Engrish and I think this article is too inclusive ... I was thinking of it more along the lines of what the Japanese call waseieigo but that's not the same as Engrish, is it. Looking at the article again, it looks like the three main aspects mentioned belong in the following categories/articles:

• "Bad/funny" translations: Engrish
• Non-native pronunciations: Non-native Pronunciation of English
• Lexical borrowings: Japanese Language (Western influences on the Japanese language)

But this would be a radical re-edit of this page ... we need to hear other voices. How would others define "Engrish"? And is it possible to have an article on Engrish without it just being a list of examples Engrish phrases like All Your Base? Is it worth an article at all? CES 06:25, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Looking at it again, I guess it wouldn't be that big of an edit ... just the removal of one paragraph. I was also wondering what was meant by the following phrase from the first paragraph that defines Engrish as "poor translation of English into another language followed by good translation back into English." What is an example of this? CES 06:39, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Whoever wrote that was probably thinking of translating with Babelfish and then translating back. I guess they assumed that was why Engrish is incoherent. It doesn't seem to fit at all. — Gwalla | Talk 22:43, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I think it is often unclear what the definition of the slang term Engrish is. I've read on the web self-professed cultural experts use the terms English Japanese, Japanese English, Engrish, Japanglish, or Japlish to mean either:

• Code-switching between Japanese and English. (e.g. "Today was ii tenki datta")
• English words being imported into the Japanese language as loanwords, including Wasei eigo ("Meeru")
• Japanese words being imported into the English language as loanwords ("Tycoon")
• Unnatural or incorrect usage of English in Japan ("Sumail Cafe")
• Unnatural or incorrect usage of Japanese in English-speaking countries ("Sushi and saki")
• portmanteau or phrase made from English and Japanese words ("saki bomb")

What one person calls "English Japanese" is the same as what another person calls "Japanese English," but can have a different meaning from what yet another person calls "English Japanese" - so IMHO they're all problematic terminologies. Furthermore the term Engrish can be associated with any other language (such as Thai) that also has problems pronouncing L. --69.214.224.74 21:16, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Is it derogatory?

Pursuant to the current VfD discussion... as a matter of NPOV fact...

...is the use of the term "Engrish" in fact a slur or offensive? I was thinking that perhaps this article needs to be NPOVed to reflect this, but was rather surprised by the small number of Google hits for Engrish slur offensive (29) and Engrish slur derogatory (9). Even Engrish derogatory gets only 352 and most of them are not directly relevant. If the "Engrish" is regarded as derogatory or insensitive or insulting, the article should say this—but in fact a very quick look didn't turn up any obvious evidence of this. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 12:38, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it is. Just because there aren't many pages that discuss the offensive aspect of it does not reduce the 104,000 google hits where it is used offensively instead of being identified as such. - Tεxτurε 15:03, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, have you got any language to suggest for a sufficiently objective, referenced, NPOV way to say this in the main article? Other than a vague throwaway opinion like "Many feel/it is widely believed/etc that whenever native English speakers ridicule the mistakes made by well-intentioned non-native speakers it is insensitive/derogatory/offensive/a cheap shot/xenophobic etc." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:39, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No, it isn't. Not a bit. By definition, anyone who uses Engris has really bad English and can't read English. Once they learn English well enough to understand humor of this sort, they're in on the joke and are welcome to laugh at it.

Given the currency and popularity of the term (and length of and amount of work in the article), and given that there is no shortage of Asians on the Internet, and given that there is no movement against the use of this term by the allegedly wronged party that even the proponents of deletion (including one who has lived in Japan for 15 years!) can show evidence of, I don't consider any argument on the offensiveness of this term valid unless it comes from a native Japanese person and speaker.

Also note that the canonical example of Engrish is, in fact, the literal word "Engrish", appearing in non-casual works. It is not mockery, but verbatim reuse. Even still, it is that term -- and not the phenomenon that it is used to describe -- that the proponents of deletion really have any argument.

Even the submitter admitted that he did not totally disagree with what is said in the article. However, instead of cleanup, he submitted for deletion -- even though by his own admission he believes the article is partially valid! In itself, that practice IMO approaches abuse of VFD. - KeithTyler 17:10, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the article I think the person who listed it for VfD misunderstood deletion policy and process. But now that the question is been raised, I think it needs discussion.

The question I'm dealing with is sort of factual. I think we can say (for example) that the word "nigger" is derogatory; AHD4 says "Offensive Slang 1a. Used as a disparaging term for a Black person." Any article about this word should say so. We can say that "piccaninny" is, at least, insensitive. The question is: is there anything similar that can or should be said about "Engrish?" Tεxτurε seems to think that the Google hits show it as being used offensively. My own current opinion is that the usage of Engrish seems to me to reflect no more than the innocent enjoyment of exoticism, not very different from saying that Maurice Chevalier had a "charming French accent." Finding humor in foreigners' mangling of English is hardly new (remember "English as she is spoke"?). It is xenophobic, but such a mild level of xenophobia as to be almost harmless. I don't even see evidence of any widespread dispute about whether the word "Engrish" is insensitive or disrespectful. But I could easily be missing something. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 13:02, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Oh heavens yes, regarding one culture finding another culture's accent/dialect/grammar of their language amusing. Poirot, Clouseau, any character played by Gedde Watanabe in the 80s, Charlie Chan, any character played by Masao Maki, even Canadians in the South Park movie. Not to mention nearly every surfer movie, or movie taking place in the San Fernando Valley, or the "jive" scene from Airplane. This is not new, nor is it at all widely considered offensive to be amused at. - KeithTyler 19:06, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

Some years ago, it became voguish for people in the United States to adopt various Sinograms as T-shirt designs and tattoos. I suspect that there were at least some of these that were incoherent, or worse, made by people who knew the languages to have fun at the expense of those who bought them to look cool. I suspect that many instances of amusing Engrish are made with similar nonchalance as to their meaning. I would probably be amused myself by a collection of such misfiring texts, were I able to read them. Smerdis of Tlön 16:51, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Isn't this page slightly ridiculing the inability of non-English speakers? The sentence like:

The more ridiculous and humorous is the mangling, the more likely people are to classify it as Engrish.

-- Taku

Um, yes, Engrish is, by definition, a humorous attempt to speak English by a non-English speaker... mayhaps you're missing the point here.. --kwertii

ad 1: since most engrish is not made in an attempt to be "humorous", doesn't it seem at least a teeny weeny bit insulting to poke fun at it?

ad 2: i think taku was not concerned only with the word "humorous". another word you missed is "ridiculous". again: when there is an honest attempt to speak/write proper english that backfires, do you find it proper to describe this as "ridiculous"? don't you find that just a tad bit juvenile? calling it "funny" would be NPOV, calling it "ridiculous" is POV, imo.

as far as the article goes, i say keep it. it describes a widely known cultural phenomenon. but it should be seriously cleaned up, preferably by somebody who can speak japanese and understands the logic behind engrish (yes, there is a logic behind it, and it's not humor).

I work for a manufacturer with a Japanese parent company. Until someone noticed, we had one of their products in our showroom, an enclosed cat litter box, with a label reading "this is the best toilet for your pussy." Perfect Engrish. --JJ

no, it doesn't seem insulting at all to poke fun at it, if something funny or ridiculous has been said (and judging whether or not something is funny is incredibly POV, i'll note). it's not mockery of 'those stupid foreigners who can't even speak our language' or anything of the sort (i'm sure this often occurs relatedly, but it's not inherent in the topic), merely humor from the strange statements that arise when someone speaks a language they are not proficient in. when i was taking french classes in school, i would try to say something and then the teacher would tell me what i had actually said, and often it was something very silly and humorous for me. --dan 03:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The phenomenon of Engrish is, by definition, the ridicule of errors made by non-native English speakers (or apparent errors created by the misinterpretation by English speakers of text as English which is really the co-opting of English word bases into other languages; there's plenty of faux French in English which is perfectly good English usage but would be ridiculed by native French speakers). We should try to keep our description of it neutral, however. --Brion

There's a selection of "Inverse Engrish" on [2], showing people unknowingly abusing Kanji. I would hardly say the term was derogatory, per se. Mildly sarcastic, perhaps - insulting, no. Examples of Engrish are just as funny as me trying (and failing miserably) to speak Mandarin :-) Chris 23:55, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

good lord, wikipedia did not create this term, we just wrote an article on an extant linguistic phemomenon. i would be shocked and dismayed if anyone was truly offended. Joeyramoney 15:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, don't attack the messenger. Or documentation as the case may be. 204.191.121.132 09:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Who's offended?

The question is not 'Is it derogatory?', but, 'Is anyone offended?'

First of all, if anyone is offended by the TERM Engrish the article should say so, and it should say why.

Secondly, if people don't want an article on the fracturing of English by foreigners then: too bad! Everyone who learns English makes mistakes, just like we English speakers make mistakes when we learn foreign languages.

If someone can think of a better title for the article, then move it -- if that's the problem. I haven't heard too many people use the word Engrish but maybe I don't listen well. The Japanese and Korean people I've known over the last 25 to 30 years always refer to Jinglish and Konglish, meaning "English as spoken by Japanese or Koreans who are new to the language".

It's really rare to hear about anybody being offended by the idea that someone might mispronounce a word or get some grammar wrong. (Okay, I once read about an English teach in Japan whose student suddenly quit when he found out his teacher was letting him get away with minor mistakes. He was mortified at the thought that his "Communication English" would be noticed by other Japanese!)

Let's not go overboard on the political correctness thing, here, okay? --Uncle Ed 17:26, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My own feeling is that the word "Engrish" is in wide use and that the article is reasonably accurate in describing it. If is is derogatory, the article should say so and give evidence; otherwise, it should not. If anyone is offended either by the term "Engrish" or by the phenomenon of English-speaking people seeing humor in poorly translated Japanese, the article should say so and give evidence; otherwise, it should not. I actually did eyeball the first hundred or so Google hits on Engrish, and they did not seem to me to show any xenophobia or hostility; it was mostly "hey, look at this website with examples of Engrish, it's a stitch" and "Heard this funny example?" Now, of course, this sort of affectionate patronization may be a problem ("Will you just look at those little piccaninnies? Aren't they just the cutest thing?") but, oddly enough, I didn't see any obvious examples of hostility cloaked as just-kidding patronizing, and I didn't see any discussion suggesting that sensitive and politically correct people should avoid the term. Not in the first hundred or so I glanced at, anyway.

Right now, personally, I'm not yet convinced that there's any problem. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:43, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

To answer the point put by the heading, anyone that is personally offended (i.e. you are offended, vs. you think someone else might be) should step forward now and explain why they are offended. Chris 00:01, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I'm personally offended--this is a term created by white people to make fun of asian people for the way they talk. I think translation errors can be amusing and I'm not ignoring that foreigners can have trouble learning english, but what I'm offended about is the ways in which this term is used to make Asians the Other, the ways it is used to associate stereotypes and generalizations with Asians and Asian Americans, and in general the ways it is used to disenfranchise us. User:Jordan314

well, guess what? go take out your frustration on people who poke fun at the japanese who use the term, rather than wikipedia who simply wrote an article on it. wikipedia did not create the word "engrish", just like it didn't create the word "nigger", we merely report on it. i know that there is some wikipedia policy stating that you should not censor wikipedia in the interests of a few when an article is a valid reflection of reality. Joeyramoney 15:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, you may be about to be offended again. It's not my intention to do so, but I think you are overreacting and missing the point. I don't think that the term was created to ridicule or "other" Asian people generally or Japanese people in particular; rather, it was invented as an apt description of an actual phenomenon. Japlish is funny, just as it's funny when non-Japanese people mangle the Japanese language, or when non-native speakers of any language do the same thing. But as has been pointed out above, Japlish goes way beyond the mistakes of Japanese people struggling to learn to speak English. Exploding Boy 21:30, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not offended by you Exploding Boy, but I disagree with you. It is an actual phenomenon but it is not an "apt description." No put down is an apt description. An apt description would be respectful, and there is nothing respectful about the word Engrish. While I don't think this article should be deleted, I would like to see "The neutrality of this article is disputed" the way other articles such as Palestinian_terrorism is. User:Jordan314

The "neutrality is disputed" tag is supposed to be a temporary measure for articles where the editors cannot yet find common ground. It is not supposed to be a permanent fixture.

I think there would be a lot less controversy here if this article stuck to the actual phenomenon of Engrish instead of branching off into irrelevant tangents such as gairaigo. A full rewrite may be necessary at this point. — Gwalla | Talk 00:50, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Again, I think you are overreacting. Comparing the term "Engrish" with terrorism is a gross overreaction, to be frank. I'm not convinced that the term is in any way intended as a put down (unlike, for example, such awful expressions as "jungle bunny," "wetback," "jap's eye," and so on). However, I do agree that the article needs a rewrite. Exploding Boy 18:39, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

I never compared Engrish with terrorism, I said that the article should have "the neutrality of this article is disputed" tag. And I think that this article should have it, because the editors cannot yet find common ground on this article. Also, Exploding Boy, isn't a "jap's eye" also an apt description for an actual phenomenon? Can't you make all of the same arguments? Japs' eyes are slanty, what's the big deal? User:Jordan314

Two comments:

1) "The question is not 'Is it derogatory?', but, 'Is anyone offended?'" <-- Don't the two follow hand-in-hand? Could something really be derogatory but not offensive?

2) "Japlish is funny, just as it's funny when non-Japanese people mangle the Japanese language, or when non-native speakers of any language do the same thing." <-- To whom is it funny? As you point out, the humor may be reciprocated, but each is asymmetric -- some people find Japlish/Engrish funny while some do not. So I ask again: to whom is it funny? It is only funny to people who are not offended. This kind of joke is analagous to blackface humor.

Since some people are making fun and some people are being made fun of, how neutral is this entry? A neutral article should not have favor some people over others. Non-NPOV entries are not welcome.

Mlw47

Hello Everybody. I am Japanese, and I think that this article is totally unoffensive and should definitely be taken with a grain of salt. Mispronounciation of words is a natural consequence of endeavoring to learn a new language. This article does not jab at non-fluent readers, in fact, I do not find anything offensive about this article at all. Irunwithscissors 23:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Is it really necessary to list every mistake made in video game translations? That whole "notable" section should be deleted. I'm learning Korean and sometimes I say or write things wrong, and I don't think a text message I send to a Korean friend with an error is anyless worthy of wikipedia entry than any of the mistakes listed here.

I should certainly be surprised if people take either the term or the use of the word English offensively, but, should people take issue, I encourage them to write an article on mistakes made in their language by speakers of other languages. It would make interesting reading.

What really is Engrish?

The term Engrish does not (canonically) refer to "people who are new to the language" -- i.e. people who are learning. It refers to bad translations done in a professional setting -- publications, advertising, instruction manuals, video games -- i.e. people who ought to know better. Another source of Engrish phenomena is an apparent desire among Japanese businesses to include or use English words in their advertisements/signage in order to look Western, but without any regard for actually being correct -- i.e. people who don't care. If you care to research the topic, you will find this to be the rule. A good place to start your objective research on the term might be Engrish.com. - KeithTyler 22:02, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Well, I think that's a good point. It's one, however, which the current article doesn't seem to me to be clear on. Should it lead off with some kind of definition? e.g.

engrish.com defines Engrish specifically as "the humorous English mistakes that appear in Japanese advertising and product design." It adds "many companies do check their English before placing them on products, within advertising, etc. (these companies get it right). There are just many companies/individuals that either do not care to do so (again, in such cases English is used as facet of design more than a way to communicate), or do not have the resources to check their English." Note that it specifically refers to bad translations done in a professional setting.

I thnk I would say a commecial setting rather than a professional one. Rich Farmbrough 00:05, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I would believe http://winterson.com/2005/06/episode-iii-backstroke-of-west.html is Engrish, in its purest form.

As a professional writer of English, I frequently notice the errors of native speakers of American English, and that I occasionally find them amusing. The errors of Asians who are using English are deliciously amusing, though. They are errors built to a superior standard of perfection, something that cannot be attained without original native fluency in a totally non-western language. There is no way that I, as a native speaker of English, could ever have dreamed up the instructions that came with a Chinese alarm clock, 40 years ago: "Thank you to perfection of alarming mechanism you never awake when you sleeping." Perhaps some day I'll rewrite the Engrish article to express my belief that Engrish is an art form. It may be unintentional, but it is art. Snezzy 11:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

---

The article claims that 600 English words are used in Japanese -- this is way too few. The number is more like 15,000 -- it depends a little bit on your definition of "used" and whether you count technical/field-specific vocabulary, jargon, and slang. But "gairaigo" dictionaries (dictionaries of all loan words, not just English ones) generally contain between 10,000 and 20,000 words.

Shouldn't the list of languages under the See Also section and Engrish itself be under a category rather than having so many cross-references to each other or Engrish when it's a different language? I propose the topic for this grouping be "Mixed languages resulting from incorrect translation"

Cheese

Japanese photographers say chiizu with a Z. Chitsu, admittedly with a short i, is unlikely to be employed as it means vagina in Japanese (膣). Jpatokal 15:09, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

My apologies on that. I speak German and English, so I tend to mix up my z's and ts's (a German z is pronounced as English ts). Will have to try that one out at some point, though. --Directorstratton 08:50, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Best Ever

"You are invited to take advantage of the chambermaid" is the best I ever heard :-) Wouter Lievens 19:38, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

IPA pronunciation

the pronunciation of Konichiwa seems to have been rendered in a horrible "phonetic" english spelling as "con-KNEE-chee-wuh". I've changed the American English pronounciation of the word to IPA as /kə.ˈni.tʃi.wɑ/, but can someone with a knowledge of Japanese phonology and phonetics in general add what is the original Japanese pronunciation of the word, with appropriate markings for pitch accent? --86.135.178.19 13:28, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

From what I've seen on TV, the 'wa' at the end is emphasized. TV hardly counts as knowledge of Japanese phonology though... 204.191.121.132 09:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Sections

ISTM that this article should be split into some kind of sections. Maybe "Origin of the term" "Engrish in Popular Culture" "Engrish in video games" et cetera. It's a bit of an eyesore as one large essay. Just a suggestion. TheIncredibleEdibleOompaLoompa 10:12, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Contradiction

Ok, the end of the 3rd paragraph says While the term mocks the accent, it is used mainly without malice in reference to humorous misuses, puns, and double entendres within written English, not difficulties in pronunciation.

And the start of the next paragraph says Engrish can also refer to the Japanese pronunciation of English loanwords or a Japanese dialect with a number of English loanwords.

Make up your minds. --BadSeed 17:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Seened?

Was that an unintentional Engrishism, or is this a reference to MadTV? :) (Last paragraph) --Thenickdude 01:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Shanghai?

This article seems to be focused on Japan, yet the top two photos were apparently taken in Shanghai. Does "Engrish" also apply to Chinese usage? 24.192.17.34 02:51, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I think we should pare down the Shanghai pictures. I'll take some out this evening. Mike H. That's hot 17:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, got to go

I was going to rearrange this page with separate sections. Word Translation, Pronounciation, Japanese syntax and so on but I have to go. Sorry if I messed it up but I think this page deserve bit more orderly structure.—Preceding unsigned comment added by FWBOarticle (talk • contribs)

Ridiculous Editing

Could we NOT turn the section headings into Engrish parodies, please? That kind of thing would be fine for a personal home page, but not for a Wikipedia article. Let's have some standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Filter (talk • contribs)

English pronunciation

Can someone add the proper katakana/hiragana/kanji for "Kurisumasu" (Christmas) to the above mentioned section? Thanks. teh TK 05:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

letters

could the "fuck" shirts be related to the FCUK shirts?

Nope. They're usually cheap-ish shirts with 'FUCK' in big bold letters. There's no way of confusing the two, really. Phileas 02:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Japlish

My browser is not unicode compliant, so I can't type Japanese, but I think that it would be really interesting to add "Conbini" to the section that mentions japlish words that are abbreviated. Most Japanese people say "Conbini" instead of "Convenience Store", which would be an interesting fact to share because it is such a drastic abbreviation. Irunwithscissors 23:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually it's "konbini" [コンビニ]. The Japanese language requires V's to be replaced by their closest approximant, B's. Also the Japanese have a predilection for truncating words, thus "convenience"/"convenient" becomes conbini. The Japanese syllabary renders this into konbini.--Dustin Asby 05:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I have several issei friends and I have never once heard or said the word "Japlish." However, the word Janglish [jangurishu, ジャングリシュ] is commonplace for what is listed in this entry as Japlish. Also, they don't consider Janglish a form of Engrish, as Engrish implies improper use (whether appropriate or not). One friend of mine refused to speak English to me as a means to force me to learn Japanese better. She only would speak Japanese and Janglish to force me to think in Japanese. In other words, Janglish isn't an improper use of English, it is a particular accent. One based on the Japanese syllabary. I understand that Google hits don't agree with my Japanese friends which is why I'm placing this notice here rather than in the entry.--Dustin Asby 05:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Japlish Link

I deleted the link to "Main Page-Japlish" because it links to the page you're already on. Irunwithscissors 02:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Monty Python and Engrish

I noticed that there's a Monty Python reference to the bicycle tour from their latter episodes. This is, however, only a single remark during a quite long scetch, whereas this one: [3] is a lengty scetch whose only point is that the director insists on swapping L's with R's.

conflict between image and article

The "excellent room" is clearly an example of wasei-eigo, not Engrish. The katakana above the "English translation" says ekusarento rūm... it's not a case of mistranslation, exactly, just an English-based coinage back-translated to (nonsensical) English. — AKADriver ☎ 17:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Complete Rewrite

Like many wikipedia pages anymore, this page has degenerated into a list of random instance. This is not encyclopedic. Contributors have inserted random instances of Engrish all throughout the article, destroying the descriptive text and comprehensibility. The images have been moved to very bad positions. This is pretty sad since the article looked pretty good six months ago. DirectorStratton 04:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

"Like many wikipedia pages anymore" - yay irony. 204.191.121.132 10:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I did a bit of work just separating giant slabs of text in the video game section. It's slightly more comprehendable, but it still isn't pretty. The whole article is just as confusing as Engrish itself. Ragdoll 22:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If the article has degraded from the state that it used to be in, and there's wide consensus that it's gone downhill, why can't we just roll the article back to the way it was six months ago? That seems like it's less wasted effort than doing a complete rewrite, if the effect is going to be virtually the same (throwing out stuff that's been added since then).

A suggestion: change to Broken English

A great many of the criticisms of this page stem from the facts that:

1. The term 'Engrish' can be interpreted as racist.
2. The phenomenon discussed is not exclusive to Japan or even Asia.
3. 'Engrish' is often used to refer to several different phenomena: a mixture of English and Japanese (Japlish), mispronunciation of English by Japanese speakers, and the misuse of English words, to name a few.

What I propose is this: the information is this article (although possibly not the eact text of the article itself) could be moved to a new article for the more general term 'Broken English'. (Currently, the Broken English article is about an album; it would need to be moved to Broken English (album). Broken english currently redirects to Tok Pisin, this would also need to be changed.) There may be a more appropriate linguistic term to use as the title for the page, but I don't know of one.

'Broken English' has the advantages of not generally being considered racist (at least, I have been unable to find any accusations of such) and not being specific to any language other than English. Also, it encompasses all of the phenomena mentioned in this article. The article could be expanded to include brief sections on other types of English-language hybrids and pidgin dialects, with links to the appropriate articles.

This page could either be changed to redirect to Broken English or to a disambiguation page with links to Broken English, Japlish, and other related concepts. What do people think? -Zorblek (talk) 08:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a decent plan to me. It makes sound sense. Ragdoll 16:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Opening this to a discussion of Broken English in general will result in a huge article unless something is jettisoned. Perhaps a separation of the concepts of Broken English (which would include discussion of forms of pidgin English, depictions of immigrants and their speech patterns real or imagined, and all senses of English misuse and mistranslation) and Engrish (which would be limited to intentionally or unintentionally humorous or pejorative mistranslation or misuse) is really what we should be striving for. The section titled "Engrish grammar" doesn't seem to belong either in an article on Broken English or a discussion of Engrish. The first paragraph is redundant to other parts of the article (or should be moved elsewhere; Engrish per se doesn't have a grammar of its own), and the remaining paragraphs do not describe anything that meets the definition of either Broken English or Engrish. 12.22.250.4 22:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

You make some good points. Separating the two concepts might be the best move. I think a lot of the material that would be left over could either be deleted or moved to Japlish (which currently just redirects here). -Zorblek (talk) 08:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

My opinion is that what this article covers is the East Asian pidgin English, or the Broken English of East Asia. The use of "Broken English" for an article that is mainly for Asian pidgins is misleading-- please find the list at [[Category:English_pidgin_and_creole_languages]]; many of them can also be said as broken English, IMO.

Since this article is mainly about Japlish, rewrite this article into a Japlish-only article and make the main article Japlish, and make a category [[Category: East Asian broken English]] or [[Category: East Asian pidgin English]] that contains all the languages that falls into that definition. By then we maybe able to take the time to write the main article of the category.

Samuel Curtis 18:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The term "Engrish" describes the confusion of R and L sounds perfectly, and whether or not the term is racist it is still widely used, and is more likely to be searched for than "East Asian pidgin English" 222.152.243.221 04:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

If this gets moved in with "Broken English" then so would Spanglish, which is a completely different type butchering/hybridization, Chicano English, which is yet another distinct version. Even so, each pdgin dialect as it were would still be mentioned by name, so people who are offended here would still be offended there. I think theres about 20 individual articles, so if going PC, ya gotta do it the whole way, and it'll likely still offend somebody anyway. Xodiaq 20:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Complete Rewrite - Why?

The only arguement that I can see for why this article should be re-written, is because it's poorly structured. The actual descriptive content is 90% fine. "Engrish" simply describes a phenomenon of poor translation which has colloquially been given a name (using a naive pronunciation of the word "English"). It's certainly not racist, and it's kind of sad that anyone would even think that. When I see an article that has been written by an English person, with very poor grammar, I laugh at that too ... and I am sure that most people do, when they see their own language written very incorrectly, to the point that the written words mean something completely different than what the author intended. This is a factual article that describes a certain branch of poor translation, between far-Eastern languages and English, which results in humour for the native-English speaker. It can't be considered as Broken English, because the crux of "Engrish" is in the element of humour created by the poor translation.--Compost 18:55, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

This is Great

Hey guys, just wanted to say "thanks" to everyone who put this fine article together. It is Great! Keep up the good work folks, (Eddie 22:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC))

Reverted

I just removed this edit from the 'Konglish' section:

Chingrish is an s term first thought to be known as an acctual " language " in the 1980 by a when used on a radio by Sir. Grant Jenkins

I would prefer to edit it to make it clearer, but I just can't figure out what it's trying to say. It also might be in the wrong spot. Or maybe it's just silliness. I don't know! --Masamage 00:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like it refers to someone on a radio show thinking Chinglish was a real language. 204.191.121.132 10:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

External Link Spamming

Moved this statement from the introduction:

 Although there aren't many websites keeping track of the reverse of engrish, Hanzi Smatter (一知半解) is the most well known. 

This is clearly link spamming - see Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming. The link has been added to the external link list. Ninja neko 14:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Phantasy Star Online

The end boss for PSO, Dark Falz, is apparently a poor translation of the bosses from the previous 4 Phantasy Star games, Dark Force.

He was called Dark Falz in PS1, actually. I assume there was a space limitation. --Masamage 15:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Pluzuma

Yamaha, has for years, advertised that the bells on their brass band instruments are "pluzuma" welded. See, for example:

http://www.yamaha.com/yamahavgn/CDA/ContentDetail/ModelSeriesDetailPF/0,,CNTID%253D1348%2526CTID%253D241200,00.html

Of course, the copy writer meant "plasma". To their credit, Yamaha has gradually removed mention of "pluzuma" from their band instrument literature, but it remains for a few instruments.

Even more poignant is that other manufacturers have adopted Yamaha's term without realizing its origin:

http://www.emwinston.com/trumpets.htm

"chinglish"

Hey folks. I lived in the PRC for over four years and never once heard the term "Engrish" used. The use of the term "Chinglish", however, was widespread. Chinese people who had written something in English and wanted a copyedit would frequently ask "Is this Chinglish?" There was nothing derogatory associated with this term, and Chinese people that spoke English well would often laugh at Chinglish on clothing or in advertisements.

The article previously said that country-specific terms (Japlish, Konglish, Chinglish) were less common and derogatory. I cannot speak with authority on these other terms, but I changed the sentence to indicate that Chinglish is used in China but Engrish is not.

Engrish is very much a Japanese/Korean phenomenon -- both of these languages lack the L/R distinction, and so both are prone to saying things like "Engrish" and "fried lice". Chinese on the other hand doesn't suffer from an L/R indistinction (although some southern dialects confuse initial l and initial n). Mandarin actually has a syllable final retroflex r (more retroflex than the english r, too.)

Whereas a Japanese or Korean person that speaks English well would immediately get the "Engrish" pun (and probably find it funny), a Chinese person is likely to be very confused, and would probably not appreciate being lumped in with Japanese people in any case.

So anyway I changed the article to reflect this. Hope that's cool with all of you.

I don't think the difference of R/L is as strong in Chinese as it is in English. "R" doesn't sound the same. But yes, there is a distinction. Anyway, I agree with the discussion several sections above that said that Engrish should only apply to professional settings, but I would like to expand it to "works", so that it includes free video games and such.

Also, "ok lah" is not Engrish. It's using slang mannerisms from one language in another language, which isn't the same thing. As far as I know: "lah" doesn't actually have a definition in Chinese or any other language in Singapore, and it's just an expression of emotion in spoken language. That's as far as I know. I just wanted to complain about that.

Also also, there are examples of spoken "Engrish" in the article that are just the result of accents and the way that a first language molds your mouth and the speech centers of your brain. These should be removed. --149.4.211.86 15:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard "chinlish" before, but when I was really into South Korean music in highschool, I heard the term "Konglish" an aweful lot. But R/L doesn't apply to them; they use both. --LikaLaruku 06:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy

Does this really need its own dedicated section? Everdred 04:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Possibly. As a series, it's notable for the large amount of Engrish.

Why not turn the section into its own article then? The Engrish in Video Games section is ridiculously long as it is. NighTrekr 18:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Backstroke of the West

Should Backstroke of the West be added to this article? It's arguably the greatest example of Engrish in history. That, and a Fellowship of the Ring sub I've heard of, where Uruk-Hai was translated as "bitch man" and hobbit as "half-bitch man." :D

Far too many examples

There really only needs to be between 3 and 5 examples of Engrish given. Some people got way too carried away as it is now.--SeizureDog 19:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

You said it. I would support aggressive trimming. --Masamage 20:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. —Ragdoll 21:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

But the exampers are fun! I found a thermometer which said "High Gunkly." I bereave it to have been a mistranscliption of "high quality." Matchups 03:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it is pretty crufty. I'd try trimming it down but I can't help but think it'll be reverted for vandalism or something. --Foot Dragoon 06:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Not if you justify your trimming in the edit summary. I would support cutting down on the examples. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 13:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Japlish

I remember an article about the list of english words written in katakana (for intance toilet トイレtoire　resturant レストラン resutoran, as opposed to having "to" at the end) Is the article still here? Am I just not typing the right keyowrds to find it? "THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 01:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Japanese R & L

Actually, there are 3 different ways to pronounce it, depending entirely on the Japanese dialect & area. One sounds more like Ra, one sounds like saying Ra & La at the same time, & one sounds like La. Famous Japanese singer/actor/model Gackt uses a rather strong L. --LikaLaruku 06:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

disputed

"Because Japanese has only five vowels"

It has eiht vowels: a e i o r u ai ar. -lysdexia 03:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

It only has a i u e o. Your other three aren't vowels. --Masamage

So does English!

What?

I'm assuming that's why a small imported trash can in my room says "enjoy cold days warm milk" and "tulips tiptoe through". ~user:orngjce223how am I typing? 02:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

"Mitsuki"?

Yesterday I removed the link to Mitsuki because it leads to a deleted & protected page. I have no idea what show, manga, web-comic, or whatever contains this character. I'm always reluctant to remove content, so if someone actually knows the origin of this "Mitsuki" maybe the sentence could be changed a bit. (Google got me far too many hits to be certain of anything.) Remove it, for all I care. --Rassilon 05:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Japlish v Engrish

I have seen no evidence that "Japlish" is considered more derogatory than "Engrish", and doubt it's factual accuracy since Engrish is a variant of the "flied lice" "joke" which makes fun of pronunciation, whereas Japlish is just a concatentation of Japanese and English. I'm not sure about the origin of other terms such as "Janglish for Japan, Konglish for Korea, and Chinglish for China", but there is still nothing to indicate that these are particularly derogatory.

People reading this article and editing it may find it derogatory, but unless a reliable source can be found, it is not encyclopaedic to add such things to the article. GDallimore 13:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The reason it's viewed as such is because of the derogatory term "Jap" which is why animation from Japan is now called anime and not Japanimation, because it leads to the assumption that you can call Japanese "Jap" which is a racial slur made by American soldiers in WWII and also has a history behind it such as the US concentration camps for the Japanese. (often posted on signs as a way to say that they wouldn't serve Japanese who were born in America with jobs, etc.) --Hitsuji Kinno 22:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

M*A*S*H episode

which episode of M*A*S*H had the labbi for Bliss? maybe that could be added to the engrish in TV section? thanks. Ilikefood 22:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm against adding anymore of Engrish examples. We have too much of the unencyclopedic material already, and it's cluttering up the article. See also What Wikipedia is not. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 08:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Engrish isn't just Japanese

I've seen engrish all over the world, including in France, Tanzania, and Mexico. Shouldn't this be noted? It's really found everywhere, even if the East Asians are best known for it. (196.43.65.112 16:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC))

Engrish (I think) is a type of English which is mostly characterized by substituting "l" for "r". Like Election. Lol. --BiT 16:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I live in Tanzania at the moment(missionary kid), and swahili slurs l into r (and a lot of other sounds can't be done)a lot. My math teacher, the only non-missionary, accused me of not using rogic once when I used different formulae than he wanted.

Unused Engrish Image

One unused public domain Engrish image is located at Image:EngrishSweatshirt.jpg. --Strangerer (Talk) 22:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Huh; that used to be there. I've reinserted it. --Masamage ♫ 01:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Pigeon English

In England itself, Engrish is most notably called Pigeon English, and I could not find reference to this in the article, other that in one url at the external links section.

I think you mean Pidgin English, which is a somewhat related but distinct concept. — Gwalla | Talk 23:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Massive cleanup of "examples"

Wow, Ptcamn, that was bold! Drastic but a good move. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, after all. Anyone who wants all that back should first discuss their reasoning here. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 03:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I come to Wikipedia for knowledge and trivia, and that included both? So I would actually want that back. --BiT 18:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Yay! I've been wanting someone to do that forever. (Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.) --Masamage ♫ 18:54, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

BiT, if you're looking for trivia, you should find somewhere else to go. While I enjoy trivia as much as you would, here, we're trying to make an encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 04:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

There are some examples that deserve mentioning (e.g. all your base are belong to us), but I'm afraid if we put them in list form people will just add countless more minor examples, ignoring the bit up the top that says "Notable examples". They should be worked into the prose, instead. --Ptcamn 04:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

hmmm fantastic every single piece of interesting imformation has now been removed, i'm sure someone could of at least moved it to a more relevant area, or made one under the heading engrish in videogames or something like that, instead i have to trawl through edits to find the information i'm looking for.

I think the examples of Engrish should be brought back, or at least have its own article. Thank you for your playing! TanookiMario257 (talk) 18:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Black Jesus Voice

User:Carol the Dabbler pointed out that this is the name of a British music album by Richard H. Kirk, so I have removed Image:BLACKJESUS.jpg from the article, as it is not an example of Engrish. --Masamage ♫ 21:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Chinese character tattoo

The opposite of Engrish is probabably misused Chinese character tattoos. Hanzi Smatter is a related article. Anyone wants to mention this in this article to expand the scope? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawnc (talk • contribs)

Is there a better term than "Engrish"?

I'm not fond of this term, not only because it is flatly xenophobic, but also because it implies that all odd English phrases used in Japan are accidental, when many of them are deliberate and artistic. Serendi^podous 08:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the name, but I do strongly believe we should be distinguishing between bad machine translations, bad human translations, English loanwords in Japanese (which, AFAIK, is not usually called "Engrish"), and so forth.

...Actually, after I wrote that, I've realized that it would be better to move this to the broader English in Japan, which would cover more and not imply that it's all just mistakes. --Ptcamn 08:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

pet bottle

I don't think this is that great an example of the wrong loanword situation. "Pet" (PET) refers specifically to the type of plactic used in soda bottles (Polyethylene terephthalate). So it is actually the correct terminology to use in english as well, confusing as it may sound to a lot of people. I think there are better examples of the loanword phenomenon such as "manshon" from the english mansion, which means an apartment house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.196.41 (talk) 07:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Korean lack of a final "r"

Why does this matter? There are plenty of dialects of English that have no final "r". 82.36.26.70 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 23:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Any more reverse engrish?

There's just one link for reverse enrish. Anybody know any more? It's really funny what some people tattoo on themselves! -OOPSIE- 16:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)