Something I've been noticing as I get closer to finishing RTK1.

1. Mnemonic vs Full stories: Just like Heisig says, you want a full story to start off the Kanji no matter how easy the mnemonic comes to mind. If you're adapting or copying a story, keep this in mind.

2. Visual picture: I don't think Heisig agreed with this, but it seems if I can get a surreal picture in my head via a verbose story, the kanji seems to stick in my head. Physically seeing in a Cramped space a Spartan man holding off a Pack of Wild Dogs with only a pair of Scissors (adapted from 300 where he used a spear on one wolf) makes me remember Cramped all the better.

3. Start the story with the Keyword: seems most stories that have the keyword at the middle or end is more difficult to remember. With the keyword at or near the beginning, it becomes the catalyst to bring the entire picture to mind.

4. If possible, relate a major primitive to the keyword. Keywords relating to water I now point out the relation. Same with thread, mountain, metal, etc. That way, not only the keyword but the key primitive can become the exciter to bring the full story to mind.

5. The Keyword "Concept" must be in the story: Yes, we're learning Kanji in English but we have to be careful. This may be a big picture thing, but if you have a different concept in your story because it's easier (even though it's the same word) you may run into problems later on when you begin actual reading. I'm only saying this for Keywords only. For primitive use, it's a whole other matter (using Spiderman for Thread, Alice for Grow Up, Knot for Not, etc.)

I haven't written anything new here. Just thought I'd post a bit seeing as I'm getting near 1600 (only 850 in the 5th stack though).

One thing I think is important to is to go with the first thing that pops into your mind for a keyword. So for example for the word "don" if the first thing that pops into your head is Don Corleone use that in your story. Or if "Dawn" pops into your head, use that (but be sure to incorporate the correct meaning) Or maybe you think of Don Knotts first...If your brain has a strong association already with a word, don't fight it, put it to work for you

If all you were interested in is the English meaning or pronouncement of these Kanji I would agree with you. However, ultimately we want to associate that Kanji with the concept that translate into other languages. Don Correleone (sp?) doesn't really jibe with the concept to wear something or to put something on. However, if using Don Correleone in a story that gets Don to mean Wearing which you connect that to 着 (Don or to wear) or 水着 (bathing suits) or 着て (wearing), yeah I think you'll be on the right path.

The keyword is more than just a pronunciation, it is a concept. That's why you'll see Heisig make a note about the actual meaning of the keyword he's supplying.

Of course, seeing that only 850 (of the 1600 I considered initially studied) of my characters are in the 5th box, I obviously have a long way to go. It's just that in the last 4 weeks of adding in about 30 new characters a day and reviewing 100 or so a day and studying 30 to 40 missed Kanji a day, I began noticing a pattern into what was staying and what was getting missed.

Nukemarine Wrote:The keyword is more than just a pronunciation, it is a concept. That's why you'll see Heisig make a note about the actual meaning of the keyword he's supplying.

In the short term, yes. In the long term, no, the keyword is nothing. The keyword is merely a label that is used to distinguish between the different kanji. The keywords could have just as well been A, B, C, all the up to Z^115, since one word in another language isn't going to fully explain another word in another. As we grow more familiar with the kanji, the keywords should fall away and be replaced by their actual, true, meaning. No amount of intuition is going to allow you to figure what 射精 means with Heisig keywords (assassination of aristocracy?): you see past them and append meanings and connotations seamlessly.

The keyword is merely a hook and should be used as such.

Well, there's reasonable disagreement on some of Heisig's choice for keywords. Yeah, I wouldn't have guessed that Shoot 射 and Refined 精 together would mean Ejaculate 射精. So not only do you have to get a concept of the kanji down (which we're using English keywords, stories and mnemonics to get into deep memory), we then have the much larger task ahead of learning compound words. Granted, I'm already seeing that with myself so hopefully I'm on the right track.

On an aside, it's funny that others pan Heisig's method by saying "Oh, you know kanji, but you don't know compound words, it's useless." I get the feeling those with Heisig (or a variant such as Kanji ABC), will learn compounds much, much faster. Partly I'm thinking we will continue our "training" of using mnemonics and keywords into the compound area. Time will tell. Any advance learners care to comment one way or another on that?

I agree with the idea that compounds will get picked up faster (or at least, I'm finding it that way for me), but not that it's because of mnemonics and keywords--I don't use them at all for compounds (and honestly don't recommend it, but that's just me), but being familiar enough with the characters to be able to produce them from scratch myself is a big boost in and of itself.

~J

I don't know about anyone else but for compounds I simply intend to extend the heisig method of studying by making a story involving the keywords of the two kanji that create the compound. Is this bad?

Look at English for example. On the one hand, it'd be crazy to start learning written English without knowing the names of the letters of the alphabet. Even though some of those names (W? Y? Q?) seem to be a little arbitrary. On the ooooother hand... if you just teach someone the letters of the alphabet, it'd be crazy to ask them to use just that to figure out the meaning of "e-j-a-c-u-l-a-t-e". Knowing the letters and knowing how to read them are totally different tasks but each is impossible without the other.

Wizard Wrote:I don't know about anyone else but for compounds I simply intend to extend the heisig method of studying by making a story involving the keywords of the two kanji that create the compound. Is this bad?

Beware of falling into the "multiplication table trap". Kids in elementary school learn clever little tricks to multiply numbers with some special technique. At the time, they're happy cuz they don't have to memorize the multiplication tables. Fifteen years later, they're wishing they had memorized the tables as they struggle with a math test where they have to waste 10 seconds for each multiplication to run their clever little trick.

When you learn a new English (or whatever your native tongue is) word, you virtually never use mnemonics. Learning a new Japanese word should be like learning a new word in your native tongue: in fact, just pretend it IS a word in your native tongue, which you somehow went your whole life without encountering.

woodwojr Wrote:I agree with the idea that compounds will get picked up faster (or at least, I'm finding it that way for me), but not that it's because of mnemonics and keywords--I don't use them at all for compounds (and honestly don't recommend it, but that's just me), but being familiar enough with the characters to be able to produce them from scratch myself is a big boost in and of itself.

~J

I feel this way too. I just try to take my time and internalize the compound, the reading and the kanji that make it up.

Nukemarine Wrote:If all you were interested in is the English meaning or pronouncement of these Kanji I would agree with you. However, ultimately we want to associate that Kanji with the concept that translate into other languages. Don Correleone (sp?) doesn't really jibe with the concept to wear something or to put something on.

You should always go with your first instinct. Always, always, always. Your brain works on associations, and the first thing you think of is what's already associated (even if you don't know why). Because of this, it's best to use these associations rather than fight them. So what if it's not exact? I have somebody saying "certainly" like a maid would, to remember the meaning of a kanji for "certain". I remember fine having learned it a long while ago. You will remember the real meaning because the images serve as reminders.

Besides, it's easy enough to have Don Corleone putting on clothes to remember in most images. I just don't like you saying you shouldn't use the first thing that comes to mind because it's not perfect when that's the opposite of how it works.

Since I'm going through and remembering multiple definitions from a dictionary for the kanji I'm learning, I've gotten to trust the first thing that pops in mind because it always works best, even if it's totally weird.

"Your reaction must be immediate. It doesn't matter if the likeness is vague. The person must simply serve as a reminder, a trigger. Let your mind wander."

snispilbor Wrote:Beware of falling into the "multiplication table trap".

Mnemonics like ones for multiplication are designed to fall away over time as the paths get woven into your brain. For the most part they do. I've never encountered anyone who has ever had mnemonics be a hindrance to them. That's just crazy.

The same thing goes for Heisig. I know that I've forgotten completely some of the stories I came up with, but what remains is a path between the general meaning of the kanji and how to write it. I think Heisig even mentions this is in the introduction.

snispilbor Wrote:Look at English for example. Knowing the letters and knowing how to read them are totally different tasks but each is impossible without the other.

When you learn a new English (or whatever your native tongue is) word, you virtually never use mnemonics.

Firstly, Japanese is a different type of language, and your analogy is flawed. If you want to compare alphabet to alphabet you would have to compare the roman alphabet to hiragana or katakana. Those characters alone, of course, do not have inherent meaning.

Yet there are certain groups of the characters that tend to have the same or related meanings. In English we call those word parts, and they derive from greek, roman, latin, etc. Most children, at some point, study these word parts in their English classes so that their use of English can become a little bit more powerful.

Japanese has word parts too, but they're called kanji. Learning their general meaning is very very helpful for putting together the deeper meaning of a new word. I know that I simply cannot remember new vocabulary if I don't study the kanji along with it. Hiragana and katakana do not have inherent meaning, and thus you're relying on a brute force pathway for remembering. This is inefficient and inaccurate.

By knowing the deeper meanings, like from studying Heisig or English meanings, you're less likely to make spelling or pronunciation errors that fundamentally change the meaning of the words.

I know that from my experience in Japanse classes(and living in Japan currently) that the students who take the time to understand the kanji, not just rote memorize them, end up making fewer errors than the students who don't. There are students I know in the class that constantly screw up 動物園 because we haven't studied the 園 part of the kanji yet. They end it with　いん rather than えん. If they understood that it was the same use of 園 as 公園, etc. they would never make this type of mistake.

Japanese is designed for language learning through mnemonics. To not take advantage of this power is silly, and leaves people without an instinct for the language. A direct mnemonic, like 公園 = public park, might not always be available, but for the majority of words mnemonics like that will be appropriate. I would hate to throw out all the useful mnemonics like 公園 just because words like 幼稚園 exist. Yet even those compound words that don't quite map directly to the general meaning of the kanji, even those have a bizarre way of sticking because of their strangeness.

The Heisig method maps very well to compound words. I know from experience that it does.

snispilbor Wrote:Beware of falling into the "multiplication table trap". Kids in elementary school learn clever little tricks to multiply numbers with some special technique. At the time, they're happy cuz they don't have to memorize the multiplication tables. Fifteen years later, they're wishing they had memorized the tables as they struggle with a math test where they have to waste 10 seconds for each multiplication to run their clever little trick.

Hah. Not to get off topic, but IMO the real trap is memorizing the multiplication table--anything covered by the table takes on the order of three seconds to do mentally, and the table method completely fails to scale. Granted, you still end up memorizing it over time, but it's more memoization than memorization--I've got, say, 8*7 memorized because I've performed it so many times, rather than because I wasted effort learning it in kindergarten.

~J

woodwojr Wrote:

snispilbor Wrote:Beware of falling into the "multiplication table trap". Kids in elementary school learn clever little tricks to multiply numbers with some special technique. At the time, they're happy cuz they don't have to memorize the multiplication tables. Fifteen years later, they're wishing they had memorized the tables as they struggle with a math test where they have to waste 10 seconds for each multiplication to run their clever little trick.

Hah. Not to get off topic, but IMO the real trap is memorizing the multiplication table--anything covered by the table takes on the order of three seconds to do mentally, and the table method completely fails to scale. Granted, you still end up memorizing it over time, but it's more memoization than memorization--I've got, say, 8*7 memorized because I've performed it so many times, rather than because I wasted effort learning it in kindergarten.

~J

I remember one that was about 9. 9 times any other single digit number is equal to: the first digit is one less than the other number and the second digit is whatever it takes to make the sum of both digits equal 9.

erlog Wrote:I've never encountered anyone who has ever had mnemonics be a hindrance to them. That's just crazy.

I have encountered such people (I actually teach math). I agree the mnemonic should melt away ideally, for some people it doesn't though. You're right though, multiplication tables aren't that good an analogy for Japanese...

I can see where I was misunderstood. I'm not saying people should necessarily learn words by rote from readings. What I meant to convey (and it's entirely my own fault for not making it explicit enough) is that mnemonics aren't really necessary. You're absolutely right about English root words, so I'll go with that analogy. I think using mnemonics for compound words would be similar to using mnemonics to learn English vocabular words like "runner", "desktop", "chalkboard". In my personal experience, my time's better spent reading Japanese than using English to analyze Japanese and make mnemonics. Sure, it took a few reviews to learn say 大騒ぎ or ぬいぐるみ, but that gave me a better understanding of the words (reading them in context in a sentence) anyway.

Another thing about mnemonics is they're inherently English based and Japanese is not English. With the ejaculate example, the very idea of an (English) mnemonic kind of boxes you into the direct translation, that is, you identify 射精 with the english "ejaculate" even though there are likely subtle differences.

Returning to "mnemonics melting away": in the time it takes the mnemonic to melt away through use... presto, you've learned the word. The mnemonic was unnecessary. "The moonrock was fake, it was your own power all along!" Granted the mnemonic might give you a crutch method of *translating an English word* into Japanese, unnaturally and unfluently, until such time as you do learn it...

I'll go back though to reciting SnisPilbor's Principle of Language Acquisition: There is no wrong way to learn a language, as long as you keep exposing yourself to it. Afterall, if you took any reasonable Japanese infant and forced them to use any language acquisition strategy whatsoever (mnemonics, no mnemonics...) they'd still learn perfect Japanese.

erlog Wrote:The same thing goes for Heisig.

Yes of course, perish the thought of using rote to memorize kanji (why would we be here...?) The difference is that you've gotta deliberately learn kanji sometime. A native Japanese person who never deliberately studied kanji wouldn't learn them if she spent 100 years poring over texts she couldn't understand, whereas she'd learn the spoken language (and hence the words) before she was old enough to get a library card.

We are in agreement, when it comes to kanji there's no way but Heisig

It isn't so much about using a mnemonic to memorize the words. It's about remembering things better by having a deeper understanding. 2 of the words you mention, desktop and chalkboard, have things about them that could provide more depth. Understanding the construction of "desktop" could lead to more immediate understanding of words like "tabletop" or "topside." Knowing the different parts of "chalkboard" or "blackboard" would help "whiteboard" make more sense.

It's interesting that you used ぬいぐるみ as an example. That word is one that I absolutely could not recall without first having an explanation. Once I had that explanation, I never forgot it.

They are also not inherently English-based. As I learn Japanese, the English names for kanji fall away too. I know the kanji 園 based on it's pronunciation and words it is used in.

The expectation that the mnemonics will somehow remain forever I don't think is reasonable. It doesn't bear any resemblance to the way most people use mnemonics, I think. There will always be the students you talk about, the ones for which the mnemonics do not melt away, but in most cases they will.

The mnemonic melting specifically prevents the problem of the English becoming a crutch.

snispilbor Wrote:Returning to "mnemonics melting away": in the time it takes the mnemonic to melt away through use... presto, you've learned the word.

Of course. That's the idea. A mnemonic is useful for ushering people between not knowing and knowing. It's there to make the process smoother and go by more quickly. They do that. Otherwise we wouldn't use them.