CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

List of Go terms

Wikimedia list article

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 21, 2026
Entity authorityQ1344347
Source-derived summary

Players of the game of Go often use jargon to describe situations on the board and surrounding the game. Such technical terms are likely to be encountered in books and articles about Go in English as well as other languages. Many of these terms have been borrowed from Japanese, mostly when no short equivalent English term could be found. This article gives an overview of the most important terms.

Use of Japanese terms

Although Go originated in China before the Confucian era, where it is called Weiqi, the current English and Western technical vocabulary borrows a high proportion of terms from the Japanese language because it was through Japan that the West was introduced to Go.

Many of these terms are from a jargon used for technical Go writing and are to some extent specially developed for Go journalism. Some authors of English-language Go materials avoid use of Japanese technical terms, and the way they are applied can differ in subtle ways from the original meanings.

A few Korean-language terms have come into use (e.g., Korean: haengma as a way of describing the development of stones).

Terms

Aji

Aji (Japanese: 味; Chinese: 味道; pinyin: wèi dào; Wade–Giles: wei4 tao4, Korean 맛 [ma:t]) meaning 'taste' refers to the latent potential of stones to open various avenues of play. The aji in various positions on the board impacts the course of the game regardless of whether a player makes moves to realize the latent potential.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “List of Go terms” as wikimedia list article. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around List, terms and Wikimedia.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current 243-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with List, terms and Wikimedia providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “List of Go terms”, the useful work is to connect “wikimedia list article” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1344347. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “List of Go terms”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow List of Go terms primary sources, List of Go terms archive and List research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “List of Go terms”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from List of Go terms” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.