Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Does Japlish have an established meaning? (Some use it as "mixed usage of Japanese and English" and others use it as "Engrish". But very few seem to use it as "Gairaigo" as described in the article.)Jirou (talk) 09:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gairaigo has a clear meaning, but the practice is a little more ambiguous. Speaking from experience, it often happens that a Japanese person believes that a loan word is actually correct English, rather than a loanword that has been adopted into Japanese. The "cool" image of English makes presentations of it seem an example of Engrish to native English speakers, although this is not helped by anglophones resident in Japan in particular often speaking poor Japanese, and so themselves not knowing what is an attempt at English, and what is a loan word. VsevolodKrolikov 12:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by VsevolodKrolikov (talkcontribs)

I've never heard the term Engrish - suspect it is someone's racist idea of a joke. However, the word Japlish is in the Oxford English Dictionary I believe. I suggest this page is renamed accordingly.--Hontogaichiban (talk) 15:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Google reports "[a]bout 2,870,000 results" and delivers 232 of them, with at the head. See their FAQ.

and ive never heard "Japlish" before, and its MUCH more racest than "engrish" — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the two entries above are both grasping for the truth, which is that this entire "Engrish" thing is a recent bogosity, a bit of phoney politesse motivated by the equally bogus notion that there's anything racist about "Japlish." Japlish is an obvious portmanteau of Japanese and English, and it can no doubt be used to express racist ideas. So can the wicked words "a" and "the."
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 08:59, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can't remember seeing "Japlish" in the wild. "Engrish" is the usual term, and a popular Internet meme (see Know Your Meme).
Considering that bizarre English signage in East Asia is not usually used to insult East Asians nor adduced as evidence for stupidity and inferiority, but mostly shared purely for good-natured amusement, I think it is not particularly harmful, if at all. At least I haven't seen Asian people complain about it. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Planning to add some new photos[edit]

I felt like some of the photos were a little generic - they were just notices in bad English. I've tried to replace them with more interesting ones showing non-functional English text applied decoratively. Hope that's OK. Blythwood (talk) 22:26, 10 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is that Japanese pronunciation real?[edit]

Because it seems perfectly accurate to the stereotype: [ĩŋɡu͍ɽiɕːu͍] Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 13:32, 6 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Prinsgezinde: I don't understand the question. Of course it is accurate to the stereotype, because stereotypical Engrish is pronounced in the Japanese fashion. Japanese people (unless they are truly bilingual) usually pronounce English and other foreign languages this way, adapted to Japanese phonology and phonotactics. Not only loanwords, but also longer utterances. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:28, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well sure, but I meant that without a source someone could have easily inserted the "Engirisu" pronunciation jokingly. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 10:38, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe, though the Wikipedian who inserted the pronunciation here seems to have acted in good faith, as he has added pronunciations to many other articles. True, Engrish is an English, not Japanese word, but in principle it can be used in Japanese as a loanword, and the pronunciation can be predicted accurately because there are precise rules for "Japanification" of foreign languages. So at worst it's a tiny bit of OR and not really germane to the article. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 03:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Engrish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

/* undefined */ new section[edit]

This term is clearly Japanese related. Why does it say Chinglish is a part of it? That should be a related term. Japanese is not the main language in Asia. Legacypac (talk) 06:10, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tshirt Image[edit]

That tshirt image isn't a good example. It still makes sense. It just has some grammatical errors instead. Highfalutin is a real English word too. Gune (talk) 18:53, 16 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are interpreting arbitrariness in a literal manner seeking causality. As religious people do with any phenomenon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4118:9000:4C77:F3DA:72BE:22F9 (talk) 10:32, 5 July 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do you have any idea what you're talking about? 2605:A601:5A5:F100:D4C7:DD48:2065:964 (talk) 06:38, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sorry, many small thoughts[edit]

I first encountered Engrish in Monty Python, where my impression was they were NOT poking fun at any Asians, but rather at the shallow stereotype manner in which Orientals were portrayed in media, particularly pantomime (roughly the UK equivalent of vaudeville/burlesque).

For what it's worth, a '90s BBC Overnight (radio) segment was presented on how "BBC English" has changed the language, particularly the suppression (perhaps erasure) of [r]. It was introduced as a piece about "the disappearance of the British 'r'" which of course sounded like "the disappeawance of the Bwitish 'ah'." They brought in a speech therapist who tried (with limited success) to correct this. I should highlight that this is likely the diametric opposite of Engrish, being a fiat "official" English sometimes called received pronunciation.

Actual Japanese usage is hardly so crude. When searching Japanese websites for older LPs by Bill Nelson (musician), I'm basically seeking the characters that make up Bi-ru Ne-ru-so-na (ビル・ネルソン).

I cannot recall ever hearing any person of any Asian race substitute "l" for "r".

As a sometime singer, I find it a fantastic exercise to turn lyrics into Engrish — swapping every "r" and "l" — in realtime.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:30, 3 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article's point of view is not general[edit]

The article seems to only talk about Japanese pronunciation of English. But the first section said Engrish refer to Asian pronunciations of English. So can the article be more general? (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

losing its way[edit]

This article is slowly circling the proverbial drain. It even begins poorly: the header says it's

about mistakenly broken english

but Broken English is about intentionally broken English. How the heck can THAT be true, when (for instance) Monty Python probably didn't use Engrish on accident?

And as I mentioned at Talk:Broken English: I see how the ostensible topic morphs from "comedic form of broken English" (i.e., intentional) to "random misspellings and grammatical errors of English that have appeared in Japan, oh and among other Asian cultures too" without any clear supporting connection. That not only directly contradicts the headnotes of both Engrish and Broken English, but looks like synthesis.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't see the problem. Engrish originated as misspoken or mistranslated English, but was then parodied for comedic effect. Doctorhawkes (talk) 22:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Ingurisshu" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ingurisshu. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 19:17, 1 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Looking through the talk archives I see that this page has been called offensive several times. To me the existance of the page certainly isn't offensive, but I'm surprised to find no mention that the term may be considered pejorative, at least. I'll do some sourcing and add this unless someone else beats me to it. Retswerb (talk) 08:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pronunciation is a part of English education in Japan[edit]

The line "the correct pronunciation of the romaji letters is not taught" is highly suspect. I recognize that my anecdotes don't amount to much, but I had the dubious distinction of being employed as an assistant language teacher in Japanese public schools and half the reason I was there was to help teach pronunciation. Reading and writing is certainly emphasized, but pronunciation isn't neglected nearly to the extend the "Other suggested roots" section implies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnInfiniteArc (talkcontribs) 19:01, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Offensive" claim[edit]

Can we find more sources that consider this word offensive? I feel like one magazine article isn't enough to validate such a broad claim for a term that's so commonly used. Glades12 (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This it really "widely used"? I would also like sources on that.
I never heard of anyone outside of obscure internet forums using it. RKGMPhaild (talk) 11:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Asking for other sources for a prominent claim based on one 8-year-old opinion (and therefore biased) piece is not unreasonable. Additionally, placing "offensive" first in the lead (before "slang" and any other description) contravenes WP:UNDUE, and requires the claim to be moved either within the lead, or to a section in the main article; other articles with more evidence and justification manage this. (It could also be argued that, using RKGMPhaild's comment above, the single source for the "offensive" claim is an obscure internet forum, and thus not a WP:RS.) Bazza (talk) 09:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I should have added a link to this Japanese-published article on the subject which shows the term is not as obscure as RKGMPhaild claims; it does not consider it offensive. Bazza (talk) 09:20, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


@Megaman en m: I'm sorry, what are you talking about? The article goes on to describe it as "defective Asian English" that "may often be meaningless or grammatically incorrect", with "emphasis...not put on coherence or correctness". By whose standards is Engrish correct? Esszet (talk) 23:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I feel that this is a much more objective, encyclopedic phrasing. I did however remove the internal link to language change, as that is not mentioned anywhere in the article and could be debated as to whether that's a valid connection to draw.--Megaman en m (talk) 03:00, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What? The examples given are objectively bad English, "Lovey-Dovey Night Highfalutin" doesn't make sense in any language. Esszet (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's only if you view it as a way of communicating. It can also be viewed as mere decoration or a way to denote status, just like Europeans might use incorrect Japanese kanji in movies or as tattoos without caring about whether it's correct or not. If you go to the maker of that shirt in the lead and tell them how it's bad English, they're not going to care, the English is just decorative.--Megaman en m (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Exactly, that's why it's bad, they don't care. Esszet (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And of course, a lot of them aren't decorative at all. Esszet (talk) 17:13, 18 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not to be confused with Jinglish[edit]

If 'Engrish' is not to be confused with 'Jinglish'(as the page says), then why does the page 'Jinglish' redirects to the page 'Engrish'? Mranmolv1 (talk) 16:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Japenglish" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Japenglish and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 10#Japenglish until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Engrish/Japanglish vowels[edit]

Example: Standard japanese english vowels, ‘[a]’ ‘[i]’ ‘[ɯ]’ ‘[e̞]’ and ‘[o̞]’ Juidzi (talk) 10:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]