Was "乎" the man'yōgana spelling of the accusative/object particle "を"?



In the English Wiktionary entry for "を" there is a quote or example sentence using the character "乎" with no explanation seemingly where the particle "を" would normally occur.

Now I couldn't find anything in either the entry for "乎" or "を" about them being historically connected via man'yōgana, and Google searches failed to turn up anything conclusive either.

In fact I don't know much about man'yōgana at all so could it be that any character with the right reading could be used for "を"?


Posted 2012-10-19T05:16:03.383

Reputation: 14 703

1Another kanji for learners to over-use! hehehe... – Kaji – 2014-04-04T11:02:31.240

1If you're interested in this stuff I recommend reading "A History of the Japanese Language" by Bjarke Frellesvig. – 無色受想行識 – 2014-04-06T16:22:34.417



Yes, it was one form. From here:

奈良時代には、「オ」は [o] 、「ヲ」は [wo] と発音されており明確な区別があった。借字(万葉仮名)では、オには意・憶・於・應(応)・隱(隠)・乙などの字が用いられる一方、「ヲ」には乎・呼・袁・遠・鳥・鳴・怨・越・少・小・尾・麻・男・緒・雄などが用いられていた


In the Nara period, オ was pronounced as "o" and ヲ was pronounced as "wo", and were clearly distinguished. [借字]{しゃくじ}(Manyogana) used 意・憶・於・應(応)・隱(隠)・乙, etc. for オ and 乎・呼・袁・遠・鳥・鳴・怨・越・少・小・尾・麻・男・緒・雄 for ヲ.

Jesse Good

Posted 2012-10-19T05:16:03.383

Reputation: 11 123