Character --> keyword - Printable Version

Character --> keyword - Printable Version

+- kanji koohii FORUM (http://forum.koohii.com)
+-- Forum: Learning Japanese (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Remembering the Kanji (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: Character --> keyword (/thread-4350.html)

Pages: 1 2

Character --> keyword - Calvineb - 2009-11-05

I remember Heisieg writing remembering the keyword from the character would come naturally from practicing from keyword to character. However, I find that I have a hard time remembering the keyword when I see a character randomly. I will often remember the story I created, but will often forget that actual keyword that sets it off. Will this be a problem later, or will it work itself out eventually. Should I try to concentrate more on the keyword when I study?

Character --> keyword - Koos83 - 2009-11-06

Calvineb Wrote:I remember Heisieg writing remembering the keyword from the character would come naturally from practicing from keyword to character. However, I find that I have a hard time remembering the keyword when I see a character randomly. I will often remember the story I created, but will often forget that actual keyword that sets it off. Will this be a problem later, or will it work itself out eventually. Should I try to concentrate more on the keyword when I study?

I don't know how long you've been doing it, but it comes with time and more practice. The more I review a kanji, the better I can recall kanji-keyword as well. It really comes naturally, but not after one or two reviews. I can't recall kanji-keyword from the last 100, maybe even 200 kanji I've learnt (too recent). Give it time.

And remembering the story is a step as well, you might get to the keyword from there.

Character --> keyword - Calvineb - 2009-11-06

Thanks for the advice and encouragement. Whenever I see characters randomly I sometimes recognize one that I know I learnt, but still can't recall it. I do remember most from a couple hundred frames ago, like you said, so I guess I should be fine.

Character --> keyword - Jarvik7 - 2009-11-06

You don't speak keywordanese, so don't worry about remembering keywords. You will come to think of kanji based on what words they appear in. For example you might remember 解 as the second half of 理解 (or 読解 or 聴解).

Trying to memorize kanji->keyword is almost as bad as remembering grammar point -> the page number it appears on in your grammar dictionary. Most kanji have no meaning by themselves and need either okurigana or some more kanji to mean something.

Character --> keyword - mezbup - 2009-11-06

Jarvik7 Wrote:Trying to memorize kanji->keyword is almost as bad as remembering grammar point -> the page number it appears on in your grammar dictionary. Most kanji have no meaning by themselves and need either okurigana or some more kanji to mean something.

I kinda reckon that's bullshit considering Japanese people themselves when explaining kanji in isolation always give me a meaning for as part of the explanation. It's valid to a point yes, but, If kanji had no meaning by themselves then when you put two of them together you'd get a word with 0 meaning because 0 + 0 = 0. Like I said, I always get given a meaning in the form of a keyword I guess.

I'd go so far as to say kanji in isolation have no USE but not no MEANING. Rather, they have no linguistic meaning in isolation but perhaps and intrinsic meaning... if you can grasp at what i'm saying? Perhaps, like you say, when more things are added the meaning of the kanji becomes apparent. To me that doesn't mean it's not there when it's by itself.

I agree with the first point though, eventually you do come to think of kanji based on what words they appear in. Sometimes it's far easier to guess meanings of words if you can remember the keywords of the kanji, also it's easier to remember how to write compound words if you remember the keywords but that's really only needed initially cos after a few times you've written it it just becomes second nature.

Character --> keyword - mypapa12 - 2009-11-06

Calvineb Wrote:However, I find that I have a hard time remembering the keyword when I see a character randomly

I read that yesterday in the book, look at the introduction to lesson 31, everything is explained.

Character --> keyword - pm215 - 2009-11-06

Jarvik7 Wrote:You don't speak keywordanese, so don't worry about remembering keywords. You will come to think of kanji based on what words they appear in. For example you might remember 解 as the second half of 理解 (or 読解 or 聴解).

I find the trouble with this is that although I know the kanji as 'second half of 理解' that doesn't help me write it because I can't get from 'second half of 理解' to 'unravel'...

Character --> keyword - xaarg - 2009-11-06

mezbup Wrote:It's valid to a point yes, but, If kanji had no meaning by themselves then when you put two of them together you'd get a word with 0 meaning because 0 + 0 = 0.

Yeah and because the letters of the alphabet have no meaning, we poor foreigner can not create any meaningful text. That's because 0 + 0 = 0 and 3 * 4 = 9 or something like that.

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-06

pm215 Wrote:I find the trouble with this is that although I know the kanji as 'second half of 理解' that doesn't help me write it because I can't get from 'second half of 理解' to 'unravel'...

Yes, I sometimes need a crutch to write less frequent kanji. I find well-chosen Japanese keywords are really helpful for this. The example word can have the same meaning as your mnemonic and there's no need to retain interfering English keywords. (I'm relentless on this topic, aren't I Smile

)

For folks who feel they don't need to write, learning at least a representative common word for kanji with common readings is a good idea.　Drilling that vocab will be more useful in the long run than drilling kanji to English keyword (as J7 points out).

Zaarg, I imagine you understood mexbup's point (you were probably just joking)

There's an American author/prof who argues that kanji are not ideograms therefore Japanese should convert to a phonetic script. I don't buy it. Even if we don't consciously think of individual meanings when we read more common words, that doesn't mean that they aren't playing a role in comprehension.

Character --> keyword - yudantaiteki - 2009-11-06

Thora Wrote:There's an American author/prof who argues that kanji are not ideograms therefore Japanese should convert to a phonetic script. I don't buy it. Even if we don't consciously think of individual meanings when we read more common words, that doesn't mean that they aren't playing a role in comprehension.

The question is not whether they play any role at all, it's whether the role they play is so important and so essential that it's worth struggling for years with the writing system instead of being able learn it in a few weeks.

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-06

This author argues that kanji do not function as ideograms (that kanji as ideogram is a big misconception that people who advocate a kanji-based system rely on.) He apparently wrote a book about it. It's a separate reason from those relating to the difficulty of learning, literacy, internationalization, technology, etc. (edit: which he also argues.) I'll try to link to his site/book when I have a moment.

Character --> keyword - yudantaiteki - 2009-11-06

If you're talking about either John DeFrancis' Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy or James Unger's Ideogram, you're conflating multiple arguments in their books and vastly simplifying them. Neither of them say that because kanji are not ideograms, therefore Japan should covert to a phonetic script. But perhaps you're thinking of a different author. Both of those authors are talking about ideograms in a pure sense -- they're not saying that kanji have no meaning whatsoever, they're saying that they're not true ideograms representing only meaning with no connection to sound. This may sound like a silly belief but it's surprisingly widespread among people who do not study East Asian languages, even today. I just recently encountered it when I was talking to a professor from another department about my dissertation research.

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-08

"Unger is right where he attacks as a myth the view, dear to many Japanese, that the Japanese language cannot be written without kanji. Yet, his conclusion that, therefore, romanization is necessary and inevitable is based on a faulty premise, namely that 'writing is merely a reflection [of the structure of language]'" (Florian Coulmas, quoting Unger)

Character --> keyword - mezbup - 2009-11-08

Japanese just wouldn't be Japanese without Kanji. It's such an awesome language to look at the way it just jumps off the page. Be really sad to see it get completely romanized. That'd just be painful and ugly. If they we're gonna do anything it'd be all Katakana due to it's futuristic vibe.

Character --> keyword - yudantaiteki - 2009-11-08

Thora Wrote:"Unger is right where he attacks as a myth the view, dear to many Japanese, that the Japanese language cannot be written without kanji. Yet, his conclusion that, therefore, romanization is necessary and inevitable is based on a faulty premise, namely that 'writing is merely a reflection [of the structure of language]'" (Florian Coulmas, quoting Unger)

Which book is being quoted here?

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-10

Google gives me:
Coulmas
Unger (also available in romaji) Smile

The Unger article has different date so it might have been published a 3rd time or recycled into his Fifth Generation book. Not that it really matters...

Edit: I only brought up romanization earlier as a segue from Zaarg's alphabet post. If you're interested in the camp who believe that kanji is a phonetic system only, there are less annoying people to read than Prof Unger. I'm actually more interested in how kanji meanings affect the reading ability of learners who can't yet speak. Native speakers can make full use of phonetic cues and prediction based on speech. I'd imagine meaning plays a greater role for people who learn to read first.

Character --> keyword - mezbup - 2009-11-10

Thora Wrote:Google gives me:
Coulmas
Unger (also available in romaji)

The Unger article has different date so it might have been published a 3rd time or recycled into his Fifth Generation book. Not that it really matters...

Edit: I only brought up romanization earlier as a segue from Zaarg's alphabet post. If you're interested in the camp who believe that kanji is a phonetic system only, there are less annoying people to read than Prof Unger. I'm actually more interested in how kanji meanings affect the reading ability of learners who can't yet speak. Native speakers can make full use of phonetic cues and prediction based on speech. I'd imagine meaning plays a greater role for people who learn to read first.

I find a lot of phonetic ques in kanji words.

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-10

mezbup Wrote:I find a lot of phonetic ques in kanji words.

(Assuming you're not punning... Smile

)
That's great - it's really useful. I didn't mean to suggest learners don't also rely on phonetics. But even if you guess a word's pronunciation based on phonetic markers or knowing the kanji, you don't have the broad speech vocabulary to use that info. You can't recognize the word by sound and know its meaning. You also don't have enough internalized word associations, idioms, patterns, etc to be able to smoothly predict unknowns. So you might also rely on your developing sense of kanji meaning to figure out a word's meaning - more than a speaker would. You might even get in the habit of reading some words graphically without reading their sounds b/c looking up the correct reading is an interruption. (I do this.)

Character --> keyword - ruiner - 2009-11-10

Japanese Twitter users have it made. They can write entire books in 140 characters. Sad

Character --> keyword - mezbup - 2009-11-10

Thora Wrote:
mezbup Wrote:I find a lot of phonetic ques in kanji words.
(Assuming you're not punning...)
That's great - it's really useful. I didn't mean to suggest learners don't also rely on phonetics. But even if you guess a word's pronunciation based on phonetic markers or knowing the kanji, you don't have the broad speech vocabulary to use that info. You can't recognize the word by sound and know its meaning. You also don't have enough internalized word associations, idioms, patterns, etc to be able to smoothly predict unknowns. So you might also rely on your developing sense of kanji meaning to figure out a word's meaning - more than a speaker would. You might even get in the habit of reading some words graphically without reading their sounds b/c looking up the correct reading is an interruption. (I do this.)

On the topic of reading words graphically, I do it if I want to speed read. I absolutely couldn't do that in English cos i'd just have to sub-vocalize but maybe due to the graphic nature of kanji I can? Haha. I generally try reading every single thing though Smile

A lot of the time too though I recognize a word based on it's meaning, it's actually a pretty interested topic I think.

It's pretty amazing when you can infer what a new word means upon hearing it in context and assuming which kanji are being used and you actually being right. I've only done that a couple of times but it was a pretty wicked experience.

I assume natives have a bigger advantage when learning to read owing to the fact they can already speak their language fluently and know all the words by ear so they have 1/2 the battle down.

Character --> keyword - ruiner - 2009-11-10

I think English needs to start using kanji. I can think of some reasons both practical and aesthetic to do so!

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-10

Sources? Wink

Character --> keyword - ruiner - 2009-11-10

Thora Wrote:Sources?

Who me? Well, according to nest0r, if we use alphabet-derived logograms for certain uh, grapheme thingies (?), it will ease spelling issues, save space, look cool, and enable visual decoding dimensions to the language as well as augment contextual inferences. Yep.

Character --> keyword - Thora - 2009-11-10

Gross conflation and vast over-simplification. You clearly are a mystery to yourself.

Character --> keyword - ruiner - 2009-11-10

Thora Wrote:Gross conflation and vast over-simplification. You clearly are a mystery to yourself.

I'd like to see some citations, then. I'm pretty sure I got it word for word.