Hi Toritoribe, thanks for your help.It's often the case with katakana words, it would be the writer's preference
I am not sure I understand this (for reasons not directly related to the point you are explaining). Does it mean, more or less, "Even if our department were told about this kind of complaint, we couldn't do anything about it."?そんな苦情(を)うちの部署に言われても、どうしよう もないよな。
Yeah, that's right. Katakana is often used as the same usage as a highlighted/underlined word. I think that that ウチ would refer to their office, restaurant, shop or something. The writer might want to differentiate it from "house/home", JIMO.I've heard said that katakana (for words usually written in hiragana/kanji) is a bit like italics in English. Assuming we don't know for sure what was actually in the writer's mind, what impression/perception do you, as a reader, get from seeing ウチ here instead of うち? Does it just seem like the word is being emphasised?
Hmm, they seem the same to me.On a related topic, I know I've asked before about why words that one might expect to be written in kanji are sometimes written in hiragana, and you've explained that there are lots of different cases and also invoked the "writer's preference". Taking one specific example from #3:
彼女は機転を大いにきかせてきわどい質問をかわした。
彼女は機転を大いに利かせてきわどい質問をかわした。
As a reader, do you perceive any difference in nuance between these two sentences? Does the kanji/hiragana difference stand out as significant/important, or does it seem neutral and "transparent"?
Right. But the sentence can be used also when a complaint is actually told.I am not sure I understand this (for reasons not directly related to the point you are explaining). Does it mean, more or less, "Even if our department were told about this kind of complaint, we couldn't do anything about it."?
Just in my case, I often confuse which kanji I should use; 機転が利く? or 機転が効く? In these cases, using hiragana saves me from the misuse of kanji.
I can understand context being an issue when interpreting isolated written words or even isolated sentences, but in longer texts is there really usually any less context than is found in conversation?I think that most of the cases, it is context that helps.
So, I wonder what happens when written text is read aloud? Does one have to often stop and explain which homophone is meant?Plus one tends to use different words/phrase from writing - usually unconsciously - to make the meaning clear.
So, I wonder what happens when written text is read aloud? Does one have to often stop and explain which homophone is meant?
That's interesting. When I look up, say, か (as a random example), I see about 20 or 25 different noun meanings. How many ways can one say か?!The pitch accent/intonation can be an effective way to differentiate homonyms, not "sometimes" but, I believe, "mostly".
In fact, a similar thing sometimes happens in English too. I recall a confusion between "formally" and "formerly" when I was recently reading something to someone, which resulted in me spelling out the word.Yes, this does happen. I've heard it when people have read letters or e-mails out loud from time to time, for instance. They normally do it by saying what the kanji are.
However, there is one aspect to this that I still don't really understand. If homonyms cause a problem when reading kana-only text, why do they not cause an equal problem in speech? I know sometimes there are stress/intonation differences that differentiate words, but I would imagine that applies in only a minority of cases? In practice does confusion between homophones arise often in spoken Japanese?
Wow, that is confusing.Similar to the last two examples is 科学・化学.
広辞苑 has 44 entry words of か, including particles, sufixes, or counters. Most of them aren't usually used solely.That's interesting. When I look up, say, か (as a random example), I see about 20 or 25 different noun meanings. How many ways can one say か?!