Talk:Naginata

message: Naginata as sport should be listed under this article not under naginatajutsu. Naginata left the suffix of "way" after WW2 and also dropped the prefix "atarashii" pretty quick. Naginata as a sport is simply Naginata なぎなた.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.217.213.99 (talk) 21:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: This page previously read:
 Naginatakas were often used to create space at the battlefield.
User:66.195.118.2 has changed the first word of that sentence to "naginatas" under the assumption it was a misspelling. My assumption however is that this is the Japanese suffix -ka as in karateka "practicioner of Karate." So it is probably not a misspelling.
That said, I'm not sure if I should revert it or not: the term naginataka was not explained elsewhere in the article (making it easy to assume it was just a misspelling) and the sentence still makes fairly good sense with the change.
So should we leave it as it is, revert it, or perhaps go a third way and change it to "Soldiers armed with naginatas..."?
--Iustinus 17:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent points. However I cannot understand the text as you have ammended it: "Naginatas were often used by both foot soldiers to create space on the battlefield." What do you mean by "both foot soldiers"? Surely this is some sort of error. --Iustinus 06:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It was an error.  It originally was going to read Naginatas were often used by both foot soldiers and cavalry to create space on the battlefield., but I removed the cavalry reference, as the naginata wouldn't have been used by cavalry as a space clearing or crowd control weapon, the cavalry use of the naginata is not well documented, and I can't speak directly to it's function, other than as a weapon, when used by cavalry.  I'll fix the entry now. Glowimperial 14:28, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naginatakas 

message: The article on the nagamaki says the naginata can trace its origins back to the BCs.
* The article on nagamaki is incorrect.  The early origins of the naginata are still murky.   I'll try to sort it out. Glowimperial 12:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction

message: "Developed a thousand years ago as warriors’ pole-arms, naginata later passed to samurai wives for defense. Eventually, “a fine naginata became a requisite item in the dowry of a samurai bride,” said Ray Sosnowski, a Maryland engineer, Zen lay priest and instructor of weapons arts. In 1912, naginata was introduced in Japanese high schools, where it remains a staple of girls’ physical education. Though Japanese men disdain it, perhaps half the roughly 200 United States naginata practitioners are male, Mr. Sosnowski estimated.
Today’s naginata are slender and lightweight, up to seven and a half feet long, with curved tips of wood or bamboo. Their use — to batter, stab or hook an opponent — makes sense for women, as it relies on “the centripetal force of rotating hips, of swinging arms, and of the long, rotating weapon” rather than upper-body strength, Mr. Sosnowski explained....For naginata information, go to naginata.org/naginata.html."
"Choose Your Weapon: Exotic Martial Arts", New York Times, Mandy Katz; April 15, 2009. --129.49.17.136 (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorporated; thanks for the research. --Gwern  (contribs) 23:01 24 April 2009 (GMT)
The use of this citation in the entry is incorrectly formatted for Wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by AntiangelicAngel (talk • contribs) 05:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good ref for you guys 

message: Is this pronounced na-gi-nata or nanguinata? The gi is as in give?--Jondel (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronounciation

message: Not thinking these are alike--the bisento and glaive are more more 'cleaving blades', more similar to the dao, while the naginata is much more similar to the katana. Ie, there is a much more uniform blade width for the naginata. Not sure if there IS a comparable European weapon. 
Theblindsage (talk) 08:55, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Nakinata, bisento, glaive

message: "The long shaft offered it more leverage in comparison to the hilt of the katana, enabling the naginata to cut more efficiently."
This statement is incorrect. Mechanical advantage is not sought in the construction of a bladed weapon, at least, not typically. Certain weapons, such as axes and maces, do use mechanical advantage (and weight) to inflict maximum damage. But in general, the speed of the weapon is the important thing, for which you require mechanical disadvantage. For example, if I have a weapon which is 3ft long, 2ft blade and 1ft hilt, assuming the guard to be the axis of rotation, I have a mechanical advantage of 1/2. In a lever, this would be awful; I'd have to exert fifty pounds of force to lift twenty five pounds of weight. In a sword, this is optimal. Here's why. Imagine I move the hilt 90 degrees, a distance of about 1.5ft in one second. The other half of the lever, the blade, has to move to the same angle, but because it's twice as long as the hilt, it moves about 3ft. IN THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME. Thus it is moving twice as fast as the hilt, which is the reason swords are built like they are. It's about speed, not force. It's a rather persistent myth that force pressure is what damages you when hit; it is not. It is the speed of that force pressure. Most swords weigh less than a kilo. It's the same idea as a gunshot, really.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.172.50 (talk) 21:25, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I second this. The naginata is long because it gives more reach, not because it makes cutting more efficient. In fact, leverage makes cutting less efficient, because not only is edge alignment more difficult to get right, but draw cuts are also more difficult to get right. If you try to use leverage when cutting with this kind of weapon, that's the easiest way to damage it. There's a reason why you never see anyone tackle more than one tatami roll at a time with a naginata, but with a sword you can cut through many - precisely because your hands are closer to the centre of percussion, which is in the blade. With a polearm of sufficient length, with a substantial amount of shaft between the forward hand and the blade, the centre of percussion is still in the shaft. This can be remedied by gripping farther towards the blade, but then you sacrifice reach. Bottom line is, the sword will always be a more efficient cutter than the polearm. Tsuka (talk) 01:42, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leverage 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Naginata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204081704/http://home.earthlink.net/~steinrl/nihonto.htm to http://home.earthlink.net/~steinrl/nihonto.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've learned from the other wiki (a russian-lang one) that unlike a pole-arm weapon, which has a "pole" or "shaft", naginata has a "hilt". Is it only because of the oval cros-section of naginata's hilt? The rus. article doesn't have detailed explanation on that point. But as I opened eng. article I saw that there is no mention about such peculiarity at all. I think that point should be enlightened in the article. With a reference to a literature. I probably could've done it by myself but I think native-english-speaking someone could do it faster, easier and correctly. -- Nikelsad (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pole/shaft/hilt