40445
Can someone please help me determine why the kanji section of the Tokoboto
dictionary entry for dekiru (できる) does not list a で entry by itself (with no
trailing dot / nothing after the dot, and lists で.る instead) for 出, and why
there is only a き.たる dictionary entry for 来 but no き.る entry.

As it stands, I am unable to build the できる sound from the kanji entries for
出来る in the dictionary.

Can someone please help me?

(Sorry for posting the following screenshot. Not sure how else to ask this
question.)

UPDATE: I can roughly see how it is possible that the る suffix of the first
kanji is dropped, but cannot figure out how the たる suffix in the second kanji
changes to plain る.

Thanks.

[![dictionary
entry](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZQAP6.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZQAP6.jpg)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-28T11:04:26.280
40436
2016-10-29T00:43:02.913
2016-10-28T11:40:56.367
18183
18183
question
kanji word-requests dictionary
出来る{できる}: kun'yomi from Takoboto dictionary do not correspond
The exact pronunciation of a kanji depends on the word.  
Different words that use the same kanji can have different pronunciations for
that same kanji.  
出 can be pronounced as だ or で or しゅつ or すい or い, or even maybe some other
pronunciation that is not included in the list.

What comes after the dot, as in で.る is just an example. It just means that 出る
should be pronounced as でる, but it is just an example.

So 出来る is pronounced できる, with 出 as で and 来 as き.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-28T13:42:21.350
40445
2016-10-28T13:42:21.350
18157
40436
answer
I agree with hisao m's answer (the kun readings are not rules), but as I
understand it the kun readings are not simply "examples" but are actually
meant to be all the possible okurigana that can be produced for the kanji
_when it stands alone_.

This is useful in two situations: (1) when you don't know which syllables of a
word to attach to the kanji as okurigana (for example, 渡す is correct but *渡たす
is not), or (2) when you wish to produce kundoku readings for kanbun (so that
you, the classicist, can read 士渡海 as 士が海を渡る).

The kun readings are not meant to be an exhaustive list of all the ways the
kanji can be used outside of on readings. This would get confusing fast, for
example, ateji.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-28T14:59:54.850
40452
2016-10-28T14:59:54.850
583
40436
answer
While this answer doesn't readily address the issue of で vs で.る until the end,
I believe it is important that the OP approach the subject of kanji rather
differently than s/he appears to be doing.

Languages are not designed for the ease of non-native speakers to learn. This
can be all the more true when it comes to orthography. When coming from a
Western language, particularly English, we bring our own set of biases about
what a written language should look like (despite the fact that our spelling
system is maddeningly inconsistent).

Written Japanese can seem overly complex with its different _kanas_ and kanji.
But as you learn to read the language, the conventions make more sense, and
the exceptions almost fade into the background. It's a lot of hard work, and
it can be agonizingly slow at the beginning. For example, once you've learned
basic French or German grammar, you can pick up just about any book published
in the last 200 years and read it. Not so with Japanese. Just consider the
language as it is written _today_ (as opposed to 50 years ago or even further
back). The grammar, choice of vocabulary, and style of a newspaper is worlds
different from a manga. Depending on how you're learning the language, neither
of those two styles may resemble the language that you're being taught in the
classroom.

My spoken Japanese is passable, but not fluent. However, I can read it
decently enough, and near fluently in the areas of particular interest to me:
history, culture, and Buddhism. I also have a bit of a scientific inclination.
So, I taught myself to read a substantial portion of Japanese by picking up
books on subjects I already a decent feel for and books on subjects that have
a straight-forward internal logic: aerodynamics, paleontology, astronomy,...
These are also subjects that largely circumvent the struggle of deciphering
odd characters or words that turn out to be names of places and people. I've
left learning to read literature to the classroom where there was a teacher to
help grasp what was going on. Since on a professional level I have no need for
Japanese and little time to devote to it anymore, my reading ability has
plateaued.

All that is by way of background.

You can learn a great deal of Spanish, French, German, etc just by picking up
a dictionary and memorizing words. You can do this to a degree with Japanese,
but there isn't the close one-to-one correspondence between words and their
meanings as there is in closely related languages. A kanji dictionary is its
own wonderful bag of fun. (And, I don't mean that facetiously.) Yet, you have
to understand what the purpose of a kanji dictionary is: to help the native
speaker find the information they need to understand (1) how a character is
used and read, (2) its development and historical usage, (3) a list of its
more obscure meanings and readings, and a few other details. To this end,
Japanese dictionaries for native speakers have developed a series of styles
for presenting information about characters: for example, the use of a dot to
indicate where _okurigana_ generally starts (I say "generally" since some
authors like to flaunt the _rules_ ), the use of _kana_ to indicate the
origins of various pronunciations ( _on'yomi_ vs _kun'yomi_ is just the
coarsest distinction to be made, much finer distinctions can be made regarding
the periods a particular pronunciation was adopted), and then depending on the
dictionary, bold fonts for standardized pronunciations such as with
_Joyokanji_ vs historical pronunciations that still linger. And much, much
more. It can be very instructive to pick up a kanji dictionary written for
native speakers and read the prologue where many of these conventions are
explained in detail. It can also be helpful to look at kanji dictionaries
designed for elementary and middle school kids

The ap you seem to be using is obviously designed for non-native speakers.
Nevertheless, it is adapting quite a few of the standard approaches used for
native speakers. Why? Because it's a great system and, for the most part,
works very well. But, it can be very frustrating to try to learn to read
Japanese by starting with a kanji dictionary. These dictionaries should be
treated as guides to help you decipher what you see on the page; they are not
definitive rulebooks that proscribe the only possibilities to read the
characters. It is very easy to pick up a newspaper or a novel and find all
sorts of examples of readings of characters that at face-value seem to flaunt
what the dictionary has to say.

If you're trying to learn a large number of kanji, I wouldn't try to do it by
reading a newspaper or literature. Why? In a newspaper, there's a rather
specialized grammar, lots of place names and names of individuals (none of
which follow any kind of logic from a beginner's perspective, and sometimes
not at all from anyone's perspective),... trying to read a newspaper for a
beginning, in my opinion, is a great way to get frustrated with the language
and give up. I wouldn't start with literature because there you may encounter
a whole range of oddities: unconvential uses of characters, historical
_spellings_ , non-standard grammars (such as when characters speak in
dialect),....

I speak from personal experience here.

But if you pick up a book on a subject that is described and presented in an
_objective_ manner, then you can delve in and learn a lot---an awful lot. The
book can be taken from the sciences: botany, physics, mathematics,... The book
can be about hobbies: origami, tea ceremony, making paper airplanes,
gardening,.... You'll be learning a lot of specialize vocabulary, but the
grammar will be very consistent and tend to resemble very closely what you
would learn in a Japanese language class. The kanji will tend to be very
standardized and conform to what you see in a dictionary: there will be
exceptions, but since the exceptions will be occurring within a fairly regular
context, they'll be easier to catch, less frustrating, and easier to learn.

When I started learning to read Japanese, I dove into Mishima Yukio, Natsume
Soseki, Rohan Koda, and Tanizaki.... OMG. I was way over my head, and it got
very frustrating. I wish someone had just said, "Try reading this book about
dinosaurs. You'll enjoy it and you won't have to deal with obscure words,
expressions, uses of kanji, blah, blah, blah."

Japanese love the sorts of books I'm describing. Many of them are very well
written but at a level for the amateur enthusiast and not the specialist. If
you read from cover to cover, some of the best of these books will presume you
don't want to have to cart along a dictionary: so odd uses of kanji will be
accompanied by _furigana_ , at the first occurences of specialized vocabulary
there will often be explanations (this can be very true for books aimed at
people who want to learn something about Japanese arts of ikebana and tea
ceremony where even obscure or unfamiliar historical figures and place names
will often offer _furigana_ upon first encounter---sorry, not all such
historical names).

So, back to your questions.

If you understand Japanese grammar, how a kanji dictionary is structured, and
why it's organized as it is, you should be able to see why there's no need for
で to show up as a separate reading. To someone familiar with the language and
its grammar, such a reading will be apparent from the entry で.る
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-28T15:28:41.480
40453
2016-10-28T15:38:25.030
2016-10-28T15:38:25.030
4875
4875
40436
answer
First, the following five _words_ are all different _words_ with related but
different meanings. Dictionaries should have separate entries for each words.

  * [出【で】る](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%87%BA%E3%82%8B): to leave, to go out
  * [来【く】る](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B): to come
  * [来【きた】る](http://jisho.org/word/%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B-1): to come (literary), upcoming
  * [出来【でき】る](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%87%BA%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B): to form, to complete, to finish
  * [出来【しゅったい】](http://jisho.org/word/%E5%87%BA%E6%9D%A5): occurence

Next, the reading of a Japanese word is not always predictive from its
appearance (which is also true for many English words, by the way). 来る is
never read as きる when used as a standalone verb, but the word 出来る is read as
できる, not でくる, for whatever reason. You have to memorize the reading on a word-
by-word basis. The "KANJI" section of that app seems to list only the typical
possible readings, and I think it's a reasonable decision. It would not be
fruitful to memorize all the possible reading of a kanji without understanding
how it's used in a word.

A few two- or three-kanji words have completely irrelevant readings, which is
known as 熟字訓. See: [Where does the な in 大人 (otona) come
from?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24513/5010)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-29T00:43:02.913
40468
2016-10-29T00:43:02.913
2017-04-13T12:43:44.207
-1
5010
40436
answer