(2017-04-03, 4:05 pm)phil321 Wrote:(2017-04-03, 3:13 pm)pied2porc Wrote:(2017-04-02, 6:36 pm)phil321 Wrote:(2017-04-02, 4:07 pm)KameDemaK Wrote: What level of fluency in the language are you aiming to achieve? If your answer is "higher than beginner", I would suggest you reconsider your approach, ditch romaji and learn real Japanese. Attempting to reach a decent level in Japanese with romaji is the equivalent of Japanese people aiming to reach a decent level in English using Hiragana and Katakana. My 2 cents.
Not really. Way back before computers, people studied Japanese grammar at as high level as they wished using romaji, with no apparent ill effects.
For example, the following is from an "old" textbook:
Sake o nomu yoo ni natta no wa kyonen no koto desu.
It was last year that he started to drink sake.
Changing the above romaji into kana/kanji does not add any further nuances or insights into the grammatical construction being taught.
By saying that you're also saying kanji are useless and writing everything in hiragana is totally fine, if not better because it is faster.
Your exemple could be read a lot faster using kana/kanji.
Maybe you just lack confidence (not to confuse with arrogance)?
It might be painful at first to write in kana/kanji, but delaying the effort is what hurts you the most.
Maybe you don't realise how much you lose by not using it.
Do you consider yourself a beginner? you don't seem to.
Romaji is holding you back more than helping you at that point, plus it is painful to read.
LOL! Your example sentence in romaji omits spaces between the words--romaji is NEVER written without spaces between the words so your argument that my example could be read a lot faster in kana/kanji doesn't hold any water.
I can tell you right now that despite your sentence being a fairly simple one, it took me much longer to read and understand than if it had been in written Japanese. That's anecdotal, but I'm telling you right now it's true. That sentence is super basic, but I spent as much time on it as I would an unfamiliar construction in written Japanese.
Also Japanese 酒 and English sake are too different things. What we call sake is more properly referred to as 本酒. Asking for さけ (sake) in a Japan will get you a completely different alcoholic drink as 'sake' just means alcohol, and when not qualified, the assumption is not usually that you want 本酒 but rather a drink called 焼酎.
I dunno if we can point to roumaji as the culprit for the misunderstanding here necessarily though, although I can't imagine it makes it easier to separate the concepts when you're spelling them the same.
HelenF Wrote:NinKenDo Wrote:Reading romaji will only screw up your aural abilities by making you think Japanese phonology is equivalent to English.I keep hearing this; but then how do people learn any language that uses roman letters? The tendency to read L2 using L1 pronunciation rules is a real problem to be aware of, but it only really screws up the people who don't pay attention to pronunciation or don't use enough audio at the beginning.
Interesting point. Although I would say that in the examples that spring immediately to mind, there's very marked and well known differences. For instance a Spanish R, or French R for that matter. Stuff like that is actually quite easy to hear, and highly exposed and stereotyped in English speaking circles. The lack of rounding on many Japanese うs? Probably less so, and I can't imagine using a u to represent it will not hinder a learner from realising the subtle difference given that /u/'s lip rounding is so tied to the character, that we used two of them to represent a /w/ sound simply because the tongue is in a similar position and the lips are rounded in both.
But yes, point taken. However I would also point to Japanese phonology being different not only in pronunciation, but in the way the underlying phonological system operates. For instance, the importance of morae to the Japanese phonological system is made much clearer in written Japanese when using a writing system which codes on a mora basis.
But yes, I think your point is a good one. I should look up some research on the effects of roumaji on aural skills and see what it says.
Edited: 2017-04-04, 7:14 pm