[Grammar] 'Japanese' meaning a large number of people

[HSS]

I have this feeling that -ese people nouns such as Japanese and Vietnamese could be more accepted as meaning a larger number of people:

(1) They met many Japanese.
(2) They met millions of Japanese.

However, I feel if you quantify them with a clear, large number, they are not well-accepted. Am I correct?

(3) They met 3,490,113 Japanese.

 

[Rover_KE]

#1 is OK, but it's also just fine to say 'They met three or four Japanese (people)'.

#2 and #3 are implausible because of the high numbers involved (unless 'they' comprise millions, too).

You'd need a good reason for stating such a precise figure in #3.

 

[HSS]

Hi, Rover KE.

Lots of native speakers of English have shown disagreement to saying 'a Japanese' and 'two Japanese' without a noun following them; in other words, if the word is used as a noun meaning a small number of people, they don't like them; and if it is used as an adjective, they are fine.

For 2 and 3, let's make the context plausible. :-D

The Association conducted group interviews over the years. Some 20,000 interviewers participated, and they met millions of Japanese. (Or, they met 3,490,113 Japanese)

Do they sound okay without a noun following them?

 

[Rover_KE]

I'd always use 'people' after 'Japanese' in a sentence such as your #1 in the OP, but not in a list of mixed nationalities, where I'd only use it after the first, however many people were involved.

'In Florida I met three Chinese people, a few Taiwanese, and dozens of Japanese'.

 

[jutfrank]

I feel if you quantify them with a clear, large number, they are not well-accepted. Am I correct?

It depends what you mean by "well-accepted". Grammatically, it's perfectly acceptable to use Japanese as a noun with any quantity. However, sometimes speakers might judge that it sounds better (clearer, more precise, more polite, etc.) to follow with another word, such as people.

 

[Roman55]

Yes, I think the salient point it politeness. Japanese, Chinese etc, meaning a native of a particular country, especially in the singular, used to be common but sounds almost pejorative today.

 

[HSS]

But do you see any difference in acceptance of the two examples? One is better accepted over the other?

'Japanese' denoting a large quantity seems to be better accepted, but I wonder if placing a number before it is a good idea.

 

[Tdol]

It depends what you mean by "well-accepted". Grammatically, it's perfectly acceptable to use Japanese as a noun with any quantity. However, sometimes speakers might judge that it sounds better (clearer, more precise, more polite, etc.) to follow with another word, such as people.

When I lived in Europe, I used Japanese people. I hear the word used as a noun often in Asia and follow suit.

 

[Rover_KE]

When I lived in Europe, I used Japanese people.

Fair enough, but would you keep repeating people ​in a list of assorted nationalities?

 

[GoesStation]

Fair enough, but would you keep repeating people ​in a list of assorted nationalities?

No. Add people at the end: Japanese, Indonesian, and Chinese people live in Asia.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

There's nothing insulting about just saying "Japanese" in American English. We have lots of ways on insulting other nationalities. That's not one of them.

But it's also perfectly natural to add "people" in any of the ways suggested above.

We'd be more likely to say "a lot of" or "lots of" than "many."

 

[SoothingDave]

It's probably isn't "insulting," but it is unnatural. I wouldn't recommend that a non native speaker use unnatural formulations.