Corpus composition research
Kanji Pair Research
Enter one kanji to discover other characters recorded in the same JMnedict name spellings, or enter two kanji to inspect that exact co-occurrence. Every count in this research view describes the imported corpus—not population popularity in Japan.
檜
Jinmeiyō · KANJIDIC grade 9 · 17 strokes
山Japanese cypress
Jōyō · KANJIDIC grade 1 · 3 strokes
Find exact-kanji names →mountain
Recorded names
Name readings containing both characters
The pair only has to occur in the same written form; the two kanji are not required to be adjacent unless counted in the adjacency statistics above.
Surname
古檜山
2 source-recorded spellings in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameKobiyama
こびやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameKayama
かやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameHiyama
ひやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameSōyama
そうやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameKaiyama
かいやま
小檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameKohiyama
こひやま
小檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameOkiyama
おきやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameEyama
えやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameHinoyama
ひのやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameHirayama
ひらやま
檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameKaizan
かいざん
小檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山SurnameKokeyama
こけやま
小檜山
1 source-recorded spelling in this reading group contain both 檜 and 山Okeyama
おけやま
Evidence boundary
Co-occurrence is not popularity or etymology
The pair relation comes from exact JMnedict source rows through the compact kanji-usage index. KANJIDIC2 contributes character metadata only. A high corpus count can reflect dictionary coverage and should not be read as a national usage frequency.