I started KO a few days ago, but I have found that the grammar in the sentences is at a rather low level, for example: スミスさんは日本語の上級クラスで勉強している。日本語がとても上手だ。

I remember hearing somewhere that KiC had more difficult example sentences. Do you think that it would be productive to switch? The simplicity of the KO sentences drags me down down like extra baggage as my SRS reviews grow. I'm afraid that this might cause burnout later on.

Also, the foreword says that all sentences are written with level 1 and 2 kanji only. Will this cause problems later on with harder and rarer kanji? Is it a good idea to kanjify some words that appear in hiragana?

An alternate idea: Would it be alright to remove parts of KO sentences that have vocab and grammar that I already know? I've heard that shorter sentences are good.

Time spent = productivity. If you don't like KO, then don't use it. If you like KIC, then use it.

Of course, real stuff will give you the harder sentences you want over both of them.

Quote:Also, the foreword says that all sentences are written with level 1 and 2 kanji only. Will this cause problems later on with harder and rarer kanji? Is it a good idea to kanjify some words that appear in hiragana?

If you want to.

Quote:An alternate idea: Would it be alright to remove parts of KO sentences that have vocab and grammar that I already know? I've heard that shorter sentences are good.

Go ahead.

Since the grammar is so simple for KO (and iKnow), I discarded the sentences for Kanji Odyssey, just adding vocabulary words (but I kept the important aural component by making TTS files for the words and using them as Question-side cues), and for iKnow cards, I use the iKnow sentences for speaking practice since I don't need to worry about the low-level grammar.

Of course, the point of the sentence method is having the words in context, so I make sure to have the sentences or slices of them somewhere on the card for KO words, and/or usage abbreviations that are included in the definitions anyway.

It's a matter of how you look at it.

Do you take the +1 approach so that each sentence you add does one thing for you (grammar point, vocabulary word, proverb, common expression, etc)?

Do you take the +?? approach where each sentence densely packed with native material (3 new vocabulary, grammar concepts and a contextual proverb all in one long sentence).

The KO has simpler grammar, but the purpose of the book is to get across vocabulary. Hence, it makes sense for the grammar to be simpler to get the meaning of the words out there. Similarly, a grammar book may use simpler vocabulary repetitively to get across the grammar points.

But before we get too deep, how are you going to approach your reviews with sentences? That can help gauge how to approach reviews.

Plus, yes, nothing wrong with skipping sentences that have material you already know or is covered in prior cards.

Nukemarine Wrote:It's a matter of how you look at it.

Do you take the +1 approach so that each sentence you add does one thing for you (grammar point, vocabulary word, proverb, common expression, etc)?

Do you take the +?? approach where each sentence densely packed with native material (3 new vocabulary, grammar concepts and a contextual proverb all in one long sentence).

First of all, Krashen's theory of i+1 is specific to grammar structures. It states that the learner will only learn 'i+1'. That is, if the learner is at level 'i', they will only learn when they are exposed to comprehensible input that is slightly beyond they're level.

The next relevant theory is the Natural Order hypothesis. The Natural Order hypothesis states that there is a 'natural' order in which grammar structures are acquired.

Now, no matter where the learner goes, there's going to be i+1. It may be in the form of little bits, a sentence, a phrase, whatever. When a lot of exposure comes in the form of 'communication' (as in something that has meaning, as in 'real life', "Krashen suggests that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus") this is exactly what happens.

So when the learner focuses on what they can understand in communicative input, i+1 items will be found in little bits and knowledge will expand, and expand in a natural, predictable order. That's what the i+1 is all about. I myself can attest to this, as that's basically how I've done all my learning.

Sources:
http://www.languageimpact.com/articles/rw/krashenbk.htm
http://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash.html

Actually, not all of the KO sentences are as easy as the example you give... but yeah, the grammar isn't really going to be the thing that gets in the way of you getting the vocab. But then again, KO is a vocab-building exercise more than anything else.

KiC volume 1 costs 2200 yen, and volume 2 is 1500 yen. There's a reference book as well (3200 yen) that provides lots of extra vocabulary for each character. Of course, you can probably get that from a dictionary. Order from Japan if you can, and save some money. The prices I saw in the US were high.

I'd say KiC has more exercises that involve kanji compounds, but it's up to you to see how you like them. The recommended study approach is to study all of the vocab in the reference book for the kanji in the unit you're studying, then do the exercises in the workbook. So if you're SRSing.. yeah... I can see that. It's just another approach.

But as Nukemarine said, it's going to be a question of whether you want to go i+1 or i+n.

EDIT: As for what Alyks says, well, the thing is, the more fail points you add to a sentence, the better the odds are you will keep failing it. I understand what you're getting at, but in this case, it's more of an issue of being able to handle sentences with a lot of unknown crap in them. If there's too much unknown crap in them, no matter what kind, they tend to wind up in the fail pile. Too many fail points.

Another alternative that exists is the UNICOM 2級 JLPT vocab book. It's chock full of vocab broken down by kanji. It also has example sentences, but no English translations. It's something else to consider, if your end goal is JLPT-related. 2300 yen, ISBN 978-4-89689-446-2

I wound up choosing KO because I didn't want to get bogged down trying to learn grammar and vocab all in one sentence. There are plenty of sentences in KO that are i+2, i+3, and even a few i+5 vocab-wise, so I chose to minimize that effect by keeping the grammar simple. I was going to add grammar from other sources while studying KO as well, but I quickly discovered that if I did that, I lost momentum with KO, so I don't really have any good advice for you there.

I do like the order in KO, though, and I find it very useful in that respect. I like the way the vocab builds on itself, and the way vocab gets repeated as the book progresses. I have KiC, but never used it. I planned on using it after I finished KO to fill in any gaps. We'll see. I've got too damn many Japanese grammar books in my house.

KiC does offer a very rigorous approach to the study of Kanji, though, and shouldn't be discounted. It's especially good if you're going monolingual.

Great points Alyks and Rich. If you want monolingual, KiC is a good choice. Remember that the sentences will be dense (lots of words, lots of grammar styles), but the point of them is to teach that one or two vocabulary underlined in each.

Now, do you go the path where you know all items in that sentence to pass, only one item in that sentence to pass, a medium between the two? That's got to be your call. KO offers simpler sentences with English translations for ease of concept. KiC offers more meat.

However, don't forget the main point is not the sentences, or the grammar or the vocabulary. It's all about building base knowledge so you can soak up fun material from reading and listening more efficiently.

The main point is to choose something that is not too easy and not too hard. The worst thing is to stop because you are bored or overcome with difficulties. Having said that, continue to pay attention to your motivation and adjust accordingly.

Hmm...After reading all of the above, it's starting to seem like KiC might be a better choice. I've been using monolingual definitions for my cards instead of using the ones in KO. I'm still not entirely sure about switching, because I like the order of KO a lot. I like the vocab in KO, but I like KiC's layout a lot more, as it has more than just sentences, it also has useful compounds and common phrases.

KiC having "more meat" sounds like a good thing, as I can predict getting very bored with KO as soon as my daily anki reviews start approaching my daily RTK reviews.

Even though I'm trying for i+i, the grammar in KO is at an average of i-2 or i-3, even if the vocabulary is i+2 or something.

Has anyone here actually used KiC? The last time I asked about it, I received rather mediocre reviews.

Or should I just continue with KO, doing KiC afterward to fill in any gaps?

I just finished* KO on Saturday and have definitely been happy with the experience. My goal with KO was to get a jump-start on my vocab and readings, so I didn't care too much that the grammar is relatively basic. I tend to get carried away with this kind of project, though, so you may find it boring. For me, adding words and seeing my kanji count go up were satisfying enough.

Also, I was able to take advantage of the sentence project carried out by people on this forum, which saved a huge amount of time. (Thanks, everyone!)

* More accurately, I just added my last sentence. Make your own judgment on whether that counts as finished.

playadom Wrote:Hmm...After reading all of the above, it's starting to seem like KiC might be a better choice.
...
Or should I just continue with KO, doing KiC afterward to fill in any gaps?

Personally, KO goes too slowly to motivate me, but without RTK1, KiC is a rather high wall to climb over. In the end, what works for me is a combination of SRS for vocab, plus reading real materials (don't ask me what, because, this, too, is 100% dependent on the individual).

The answer to your question is easy. If you find yourself flagging in your KO studies, switch to KiC. Otherwise, continue with KO. If you are really curious, try KiC for yourself and see. Almost any "direct" suggestion I give you is useless, because which is better is 99% dependent on the individual.

There is no rule that says you have to do one or the other. There is no rule that says you can't do both at the same time. There are also other ways to study. The worst thing to do is to stop completely.

Let your motivation guide you.

2001KO grammar level is mostly JLPT3 level, with a bit of JLPT2 level from time to time.

I found KiC's to be much harder to use than KO for my level, which is why I stuck with KO. It wasn't only the grammar, but also the lack of indexing in the workbook. If there are unknown words in the example sentences they are a pain to look up.

To me vocab is a big mountain of work anyway, and I don't want to slow down that work by using big sentences. For learning vocab and readings, sentences that are long enough to anchor the words and learn their usage are just perfect, IMO. Grammar can be learned from sentences focused on grammar.

EDIT: Btw, in KiC only some of the words get the sentence treatment. Many words don't have example sentences with meat, only short phrazes.

Hey, you could use sentences from natural sources too.
Dorama's scripts, blogs, slashdot.jp, newspaper articles, mangas, novels, etc.

Why wait to read your favorite manga if you can read it right from the start and use it as learning material?

Concerning the i+n problem, I'm currently using a mix between vocab cards and sentence cards. Here's what they look like. I only fail a card when I get the reading of the featured word wrong. The sentences may have any number of new words and grammar constructions, as they are not on the focus.