Difference between revisions of "Talk:James Hepburn"
From SamuraiWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search (wording question) |
m |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Is this a criticism? Did he exploit Japan and Japanese literature? [[User:LordAmeth|LordAmeth]] 15:31, 21 February 2008 (PST) | Is this a criticism? Did he exploit Japan and Japanese literature? [[User:LordAmeth|LordAmeth]] 15:31, 21 February 2008 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Remember this was written over 100 years ago. The first meaning of "exploit" is " to make productive use of : UTILIZE " related to the favorable noun "an exploit." The meaning " to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage " is secondary, perhaps not common back then. | ||
| + | --[[User:Bethetsu|Bethetsu]] 17:03, 21 February 2008 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Ah. I hadn't looked at the reference cited. Didn't realize it was copied from such a source, rather than being newly written. Thanks. [[User:LordAmeth|LordAmeth]] 19:21, 22 February 2008 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Thanks Bethetsu, I hadn't had a chance to respond. On the few bios that I used this source on, I rewrote or removed sections that were ambiguous or too contemporary (or read like a hagiography), but I missed that line. I'll just take it out. | ||
| + | ::Actually, on reading it again, the entire last paragraph was too contemporary and outdated to leave in, so I removed it. --[[User:Shogun|Kitsuno]] 00:57, 23 February 2008 (PST) | ||
Latest revision as of 03:59, 23 February 2008
The article claims that "There is not a more distinguished name in connection with the exploitation of Japan and Japanese literature than that of Dr. Hepburn."
Is this a criticism? Did he exploit Japan and Japanese literature? LordAmeth 15:31, 21 February 2008 (PST)
Remember this was written over 100 years ago. The first meaning of "exploit" is " to make productive use of : UTILIZE " related to the favorable noun "an exploit." The meaning " to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage " is secondary, perhaps not common back then.
--Bethetsu 17:03, 21 February 2008 (PST)
- Ah. I hadn't looked at the reference cited. Didn't realize it was copied from such a source, rather than being newly written. Thanks. LordAmeth 19:21, 22 February 2008 (PST)
- Thanks Bethetsu, I hadn't had a chance to respond. On the few bios that I used this source on, I rewrote or removed sections that were ambiguous or too contemporary (or read like a hagiography), but I missed that line. I'll just take it out.
- Actually, on reading it again, the entire last paragraph was too contemporary and outdated to leave in, so I removed it. --Kitsuno 00:57, 23 February 2008 (PST)
