7

For instance, here:

碑文に記されているところによれば

according to the inscription on the tombstone

It's listed under 記する{きする}. Why?

5

碑文に記されているところによれば

Without furigana, I would read this as 碑文にしるされているところによれば without hesitation. 記【しる】す is already a stiff word, which is suitable for the inscription on the tombstone.

記【き】する is very uncommon and sounds even stiffer to me. Probably there is no meaningful semantic difference from 記【しる】す. (Of course, there are many common compounds using 記, like 明記する, 特記する, which are not stiff nor archaic at all.)

記【き】す should be a archaic form of 記【き】する, but I think this won't be treated as a distinct verb according to the modern standard grammar.

In conclusion, I don't know why that example sentence is listed under 記【き】する. I would say it's there simply by accident.

0

"記{き}す" and "記{しる}す" are almost same, but "記{しる}す" include a bit nuance of "explanation". "記{き}す" means "note down something".

碑文に記{き}されているところによれば From sentence written on the tombstone

another exmaple:

手順{てじゅん}を忘{わす}れないようにノートに記{き}す。

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.