It is true to say that some kanji do have exact English equivalents. Or more exactly, the words in which they are primarily used do. This is an important distinction.
So, 人 does mean person, 木 does mean tree, 水 does mean water and so on. And since these are the first kind of kanji one learns beginners can get the idea that a kanji is roughly a "word". But it isn't. And in the vast majority of cases there is no "translation" of a kanji that is of any real use at all. That is why in our method we say learn words, not kanji.
You are taking a different route and that's fine. Whatever works for you is right for you. And a lot of people do get on fine with Heisig-style keywords. But they certainly aren't anything like definitions and in some cases are quite obscure (because each keyword needs to be unique, which in turn is because the pure Heisig method assumes you have nothing but the keyword to identify the kanji).
So, 人 does mean person, 木 does mean tree, 水 does mean water and so on. And since these are the first kind of kanji one learns beginners can get the idea that a kanji is roughly a "word". But it isn't. And in the vast majority of cases there is no "translation" of a kanji that is of any real use at all. That is why in our method we say learn words, not kanji.
You are taking a different route and that's fine. Whatever works for you is right for you. And a lot of people do get on fine with Heisig-style keywords. But they certainly aren't anything like definitions and in some cases are quite obscure (because each keyword needs to be unique, which in turn is because the pure Heisig method assumes you have nothing but the keyword to identify the kanji).
Edited: 2016-01-31, 11:47 am