A Digression
I had a bit of a shock recently. In a review of a document I wrote, I was told that one of my expressions was not commonly used. It was the phrase "yobun no XX" (extra XX). I was told I should have written "yobun na XX" instead. It’s not quite like the manga 'Ikoku Nikki,' but I didn't understand what was being said. Well, neither expression is incorrect, and I think "no" actually has a slightly more elegant feel to it. (I wonder if "elegant feel" is the correct way to say that, too.) The document wasn't a literary work, but it was something that would be seen by a large, unspecified number of relatively young people, and the reviewer was also younger than me, so I made the correction thinking that if it felt strange to younger people, then so be it, but I still don't feel entirely comfortable with it.
So, I turned to AI. Well, ChatGPT is
"Yobun" is usually used as a na-adjective. On the other hand, "yobun no" is structurally in the form of
noun + no. However, in actual Japanese, this form is not used very often.
When used as a noun: "yobun (noun)" + "no (particle)"
When used as an adjectival verb: "yobun da (adjectival verb)" + "na (attributive form)". In modern everyday Japanese, "yobun na" is used overwhelmingly more often.
"Yobun" is a na-adjective (adjectival verb). When modifying a noun, you should basically use "yobun na." The only things that can modify a noun with "no" are mainly nouns. Attaching "no" to a na-adjective is grammatically in a gray zone.
Everyone generally agrees that while neither is wrong, you should use "na" nowadays. Claude even calls it a gray zone. (I stopped liking the storyteller who created this new phrase in last year's buzzword awards because he panders to the establishment.)
Well, I accepted the review in accordance with everyone's opinions, but I'm not convinced, so I'm digging deeper. I can't trust AI because it has a tendency to agree with you if you keep asking persistently, but even shogi AI changes its moves if you increase the thinking time, so it can't be helped. It's not the engine's fault since the information coming into the scope is different, right?
So, when I asked how it was in the past, it said that Meiji-era literary giants like Soseki, Ogai, and Yukichi used "yobun no" and it was a normal expression. It said "na" became more commonly used in the 1970s and 80s. I realized I had been experiencing the change in language and felt like an old-timer for not noticing until it was pointed out. (We don't use that word in modern times either, do we? If I were to say it, maybe 'old fogey'? But the nuance is different.) Well, when I asked if "yobun" itself was a new Meiji-era word, it said it was from the Edo period.
When I asked again to be taught examples
According to Kotobank (Digital Daijisen), the first recorded example is in Sugawara no Michizane's collection of Chinese poetry and prose, "Kanke Bunsō" (compiled around 900), where it is used in the classical Chinese text, "况年之閏月、一歳余分之春" (In the leap month of the year, the extra spring of the year).
Later, it also appears in Yamaga Sokō's work from the Edo period, "Haisho Zampitsu" (1675): "文章も学の余分なれば是を嫌ふには非ず" (Writing is also an extra part of learning, so it is not that I dislike it).
In the collection of Chinese poetry and prose "Kanke Bunsō" written by **Sugawara no Michizane**, who is famous as the god of learning, the following passage appears: "况年之閏月、一歳余分之春"
"Taiheiki" (14th century): "其の兵粮に余分あり" (There is an extra amount of provisions).
The following forms often appear in medieval documents: "年貢の内、余分一石これあり" (Among the annual tribute, there is one extra koku).
"Inryōken Nichiroku" (Diary of Shōkoku-ji Temple, 15th century): "米銭余分有之
" (There is an extra amount of rice and money).
"Kanmon Nikki" (15th century): "余分の銭を蔵に納む" (Store the extra money in the warehouse).
Samurai documents: "余分三斗" (Three extra to)."Nippo Jisho" (1603): "Yobun"
I asked it to give me as many examples as possible, so ChatGPT is the most straightforward.
When I asked further, thinking there might be a Chinese origin, it said:
"Shuowen Jiezi" (around 100 AD, Later Han dictionary): "閏、餘分之月" (It seems to refer to the remaining days of the lunar calendar).
"Book of Han" Wang Mang Biography (1st century AD, Later Han history book): "紫色鼃聲、餘分閏位" (It seems to be an insult, meaning holding an illegitimate position like a leap month).
"Yo" is the standard character "餘," but the history of "yobun" was surprisingly long. I don't think it's shallow to say it feels awkward in light of recent changes, but if "yobun," which appeared as a strict system term for the calendar, had been transmitted to Japan 2,000 years ago with the understanding that it should not be used subjectively as an adjectival verb, it would have been common sense.
Regarding changes in parts of speech, "yobun" was a noun that became an adjectival verb (na-adjective) (by the way, those that are not na-adjectives are i-adjectives, like "akai"). On the other hand, "yobun no" is said to be a no-adjective. There are also attributive adjectives and taru-adjectives (survivors of archaic language like "dōdō taru"). The concept of adjectives began to collapse, so I'll stop there.
Among the things the AI brought up was the word "shizen" (nature), which can also take both "no" and "na." I suddenly realized that I can say "shizen no kyōi" (wonders of nature) but not "shizen na kyōi" (natural wonders). When I asked if "shizen no kyōi" was an inversion of "kyōi no shizen," it said no. "Shizen" is a single word with two meanings; one refers to great nature or parts of it, like "mountains, rivers, and the environment," which cannot become a na-adjective, and the other means "obvious or not artificial." Well, now that I think about it. When I looked it up in the dictionary, it also listed it as an adverb meaning "by itself."
It was a shock to realize I had been witnessing the transition of language, but it was interesting to dig into it and find all sorts of things. This "extra" (yobun no) stroll ends here.