From: Connie & Kerry Handscomb <conniekerry <at> SPRINT <dot> CA>
Date: 16 mar 2001
Subject: Re: About the name of the pieces

I have watched the discussion about Shogi pieces with interest. For what it
is worth, my view is that Shogi can never achieve mass popularity outside of
Japan without some kind of representational piece being standard. Pieces
with move diagrams on them look technical and boring. My preferred solution
would be to use color-coded pieces: gold for gold, silver for silver, red
for rook, blue for bishop, etc. Promoted pieces would have a gold spot on
the reverse -- most of them become golds anyway. Such a set would certainly
be attactive as well as non-threatening for people who have no familiarity
with kanji.

Another requirement for the popularization of Shogi would be the
establishment of a world federation that is at least recognised by the
Japanese. It is interesting in this regard to look at Renju, an essentially
Japanese game that now has its center of world organisation in Sweden.

Kerry Handscomb


-----Original Message-----
From: The Shogi Discussion List
[mailto:SHOGI-L <at> TECHUNIX <dot> TECHNION <dot> AC <dot> IL]On Behalf Of Jonathan Tisdall
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 6:20 AM
To: SHOGI-L <at> TECHUNIX <dot> TECHNION <dot> AC <dot> IL
Subject: Re: About the name of the pieces


I think you will find that there are less manners in the rest of the world
:-)

And while it seems like little to ask to just call the pieces what they are
called - very little indeed - if it makes it easier for people to start
playing
by not worrying about the names until later, then I would rather get them
started.

jt



On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 22:12:31 +0900, Dick Iwakura wrote:
>Hi, I completely agree with the opinion of Ito san in Bangkok.
>
>Please don't call the name of piece such as Keima as Horse,
>Ryu as Dragon, Uma as Promoted Bishop etc. which, almost of
>Japanese shogi lovers will sure strongly reject to be called
>so.
>We always respect the culture of the other county, so that,
>when we play Chinese Xianqi, we never call a Ma in Xianqi as
>Keima. Ma is Ma, not Keima, not Knight.
>This is basic and essential manner for the people.
>
>Dick
>
>
>On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:51:14 +0700
>Chiaki Ito <shogi <at> MAIL <dot> COM> wrote:
>
>>Cant you just use Japanese names only? It may be a bit hard in the
>>beginning for non-Japanese, but it will be easier without any confusion
for
>>the rest of your life!
>>
>>I dont call a Queen in Chess as Jyou Ou!
>>
>>Chiaki
>>
>>At 13:02 01/03/15 +0100, you wrote:
>>>In the discussion about handicap games there have been some differences
>>>in naming the pieces.
>>>The standard english nomenclature is Silver, Pawn, Rook etc. These names
>>>come from the chess tradition.
>>>It is possible to use the japanese names ginsho (gin), fuhyo (fu) etc
>>>If these names are translated we don't get the standard english names.
>>>Therefore a third way of naming
>>>the pieces is possible i.e. silver, footsoldier, chariot etc.
>>>In Sweden we have another problem: which piece is the horse is it the
>>>horse or is it the knight.
>>>Is it possible to have one name for each piece or do we have to live
>>>with these many different conventions?
>>>
>>>Rikard Nordgren