/jp/ - Otaku Culture

>>20371576
>It is, after all, a Japanese word that has not been adopted into the English language (unlike tsunami or ninja).
>[paraphrased the following] borrowed Japanese words that have "not been adopted yet" should follow Japanese grammar when borrowed
>It's not an English word, stop applying English rules.
You seem to think that borrowers of a word care about the grammar of the origin language. For the most part, we really don't. And we don't wait until it becomes "adopted" until we start using our host language's morphological transformations on it.
You think people haven't been saying "ninias" and "tsunamis" until it got put on Webster's dictionary for the first time? You think average Joe coming home from WW2 came back lecturing his friends "in Japanese the plural of ninja is ninjas" when they use English pluralization rules to describe more than one rooftop running knife wielding slanty-eyed thug?

In the first place, we weren't discussing the entire English language community, but the /jp/ sociolect. In the English sociolect (dialect but for specific social groups) of "otaku culture enthusiasts", consisting of you, me, the other guy in this thread, and all of /jp/, it's obviously a contentious topic without a clear answer. While the English speaking community at large (probably) hasn't adopted it yet, "miko" is already part of our sociolect's lexicon.

We have a large corpus of /jp/ posts going back years, available to us right now, and by looking at it we can see that /jp/ freely adds the morpheme [-s] to "miko" to pluralize it. This survey does not disprove the existence of "miko" as a possible plural form of itself in the /jp/ sociolect, but it does prove the previous claim.

Like I said in >>20364097, it's useless to look at dictionaries and the origin language's grammar and PRESCRIBE a rule for pluralizing this borrowed word. I emphasize that because you seem to have been doing that instead of describing, like what me and the other anon have been trying to push.


Instead of PRESCRIBING a rule on the sociolect, using a corpus of recorded exchanges in a sociolect, it is more useful to DESCRIBE it and come up with an observation of objective reality.
And reality says it's fine to say "mikos".

Personally I think "mikos" sounds alright but that's not part of my points. Although it has a small influence considering I am one speaker of the sociolect under debate

Why?