Is the rebus relation maintained in Japanese exactly as in Chinese?

Gemini ---  

While Japanese uses these characters, it typically separates the meanings into different characters to avoid the confusion that the original loan system created. [1, 2]

In modern usage for both languages, the character 其 has almost entirely lost its literal meaning of "basket" and is now used only for its borrowed meanings. [1]

How the "Winnowing Basket" (其) works now:

• The Shared Loan Meaning: Both Chinese and Japanese still use 其 as a pronoun/demonstrative meaning "that," "its," or "those" (e.g., Japanese: sono 其の; Chinese: qí 其).
• The Literal "Basket" Meaning: To clarify the literal meaning, a bamboo radical (⺮) was added centuries ago to create 箕.
  • In Japanese: If you want to say "winnowing basket," you must use 箕 (mi). If you use 其, a Japanese person will only read it as "that".
  • In Chinese: Similarly, 箕 (jī) is the standard for the literal basket. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

How "Probably/Will" (将) works now:

The character 将 (or 將) is a rare case where both languages do maintain multiple abstract meanings in the same character.

• As "Future/Will": Both use it for things that "will happen" (e.g., Japanese shōrai 将来 / Chinese jiānglái 将来).
• As "Leader/General": Both use it for a military rank (e.g., Japanese shōgun 将軍 / Chinese jiāngjūn 将军).
• Literal Meaning: Unlike the basket, the "literal" origin of 将 (meat on a table) is so ancient it has effectively disappeared from everyday use in both languages. [1, 2, 3]

Summary Table

Original Concept [1, 2]	Shared Graphic Loan	Character for "Literal" meaning
Winnowing Basket	其 (Now only means "that")	箕 (Used for "basket")
Leader / General	将 (Used for "will" AND "leader")	None (literal form is archaic)

In short, while the system of borrowing was imported to Japan, the Japanese language (like modern Chinese) eventually "cleaned it up" by using different characters for literal objects versus abstract concepts.