For example the first two given are atu, 圧 and bei, 米. I thought from reading RTK2 that atu is only represented by 圧 and bei is only represented by 米, i.e., atu and bei are not homonyms. But in my dictionary there is another kanji with the reading atu (斡) and two others with bei (吠, 皿).

Does he mean that to the extent that atu and bei appear as readings of other kanji, those kanji and/or readings are obscure and non-standard (and can be perhaps disregarded)?

Could someone please clarify what RTK2 is saying? Thanks.

john555 Wrote:For example the first two given are atu, 圧 and bei, 米. I thought from reading RTK2 that atu is only represented by 圧 and bei is only represented by 米, i.e., atu and bei are not homonyms. But in my dictionary there is another kanji with the reading atu (斡) and two others with bei (吠, 皿).

Does he mean that to the extent that atu and bei appear as readings of other kanji, those kanji and/or readings are obscure and non-standard (and can be perhaps disregarded)?.

Yes.

To be more specific, the readings are unique among RTK1 kanji (in the sense that I doubt you'll be able to find an actual word that has 皿 read ベイ)

寧 is a phonetic primitive for ネイ: 泥濘 (でいねい)
軽蔑 (けいべつ), 一瞥 (いちべつ)
斡旋 (あっせん)

john555 Wrote:But in my dictionary there is another kanji with the reading atu (斡) and two others with bei (吠, 皿).

What is the dictionary you are using?

kapalama Wrote:

john555 Wrote:But in my dictionary there is another kanji with the reading atu (斡) and two others with bei (吠, 皿).

What is the dictionary you are using?

I'm using "The Compact Nelson Japanese-English Character Dictionary".