Does a kanji with only a kun reading mean that it originated in Japan?

  • 3
    Can you be more specific in claiming certain characters have only a kun reading? (give examples). In my experience, almost of all these are characters where the on-reading is rarely used in Japanese rather than non-existent. – virmaior Jul 31 '18 at 15:52
  • 1
    Please specify what exactly you mean by "only a kun reading". How do you propose to decide when a kanji does not have an on reading? – Earthliŋ Jul 31 '18 at 16:00
  • I received my answer in the comments. – JACK Jul 31 '18 at 16:44
  • 2
    @JACK Apparently you didn't quite understand the answer you accepted. It talks about "kanji that originated in Japan". – Earthliŋ Jul 31 '18 at 17:15
  • 3
    No, by "originated in Japan" the answer means 和製漢字 wasei kanji or 国字 kokuji, which do not have their origins in China. The answer also gives an example. Also see ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%92%8C%E8%A3%BD%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97 as well as japanese.stackexchange.com/q/42248/1628 – Earthliŋ Jul 31 '18 at 17:26

It appears so. However, some of those kanji that originated in Japan (called 国字{こくじ}) also have "on" readings and not just "kun". A common example is 働{はたら}く / 働{どう}

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    And there are also 国字 that only have on'yomi, like 線【せん】 "gland". – Eiríkr Útlendi Jul 31 '18 at 15:55
  • 2
    @EiríkrÚtlendi The classification of 腺 as an on'yomi is interesting, as it implies that the word represented by 腺 has etymologically Chinese origins, but I'm not too sure what this original word is. EDIT: Nevermind, the etymology is from 泉. – dROOOze Jul 31 '18 at 16:53

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