ついに

[fcbond]

We have "つい" as an entry, but only as an adjective (which I suspect is a mistake). We have "対" as a noun and classifier, and it you use it then it parses.

彼 ら は 対 に それ が 真実 だ と 認め た 。

I think we should really add  ついに 《遂に[P]; 終に; 竟に》as an adverb, in which case we should have a multi word entry.

[takkur]

Dear Francis, I agree to your propasal. "ついに" (variants: {遂に, 終に, 竟に}) consists of 2 parts, "つい"(the end) and "に"(particle), but you can't underdtand the correct meaning if you deal with separately. Then, we may need "つい" not only as an adverb, but also as a noun for the hiragana expression for {終, 遂, 竟}. And one more thing. You don't write "対" for "ついに". So the example sentense contains a typo. Best Regards, Kuribayashi 2023年5月19日(金) 2:39 Francis Bond ***@***.***>:

…

We have "つい" as an entry, but only as an adjective (which I suspect is a mistake). We have "対" as a noun and classifier, and it you use it then it parses. 彼 ら は 対 に それ が 真実 だ と 認め た 。 I think we should really add ついに 《遂に[P]; 終に; 竟に》as an adverb, in which case we should have a multi word entry. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#63>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADF55AMM5WEJ3BW3M4AEQT3XGZNEHANCNFSM6AAAAAAYGYBRRU> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>