woodwojr Wrote:This isn't to say that some of the keywords aren't wrong, or at best hideously misleading (*cough* Dispose *cough*), but the existence of a meaningful difference between the meanings of the sources for two different language versions doesn't necessarily mean that one is incorrect.

~J

I agree!

anyway: when the review asks for "utensils" and you never had a keyword such as Utensilien (which would be much closer than Geschirr), you never know the correct answer.

This means:
I see a word I have no idea what it could be in my German book.
I click on "Show the Kanji" and cover the place where the Kanji is shown with a piece of paper, only look at the Number of the Kanji shown on the bottom of the window.
Then I look up the Number in the German book, trying NOT to see the Kanji but only the Keyword. Then I test myself.

I really don't bother studying Kanjis with an english-vocabulary.
But a *different vocabulary is what bothers me as you can imagine when you read my method of trying to review unknown Keywords.

Like this evening:
The review asked "receive" - no idea ....

the German-Heisig "receive" says "genießen"

If the review asked for "enjoy" I would more likely guess "genießen".
receive = "empfangen, erhalten"
genießen = "to enjoy"
Sure, there are several meanings for 1 Kanji, I get that.
But why can't the two book at least stick to 1 meaning, I just don't get that.

@bodhisamaya: ... or in the fourth language we are studying. ;-)

quote from the forum-rules:
"discussions on alternatives or modifications to James Heisig's original method will only be tolerated so long as their are done in a positive manner and aim to help members to reach their goal (be it completing RTK or attaining kanji literacy)."

I have no idea why some users who posted in this thread - need to stress my skills. when posting "off topic" please use the "off topic" forum and not the "general discussion" forum since this thread is obviously not about better and worse levels of some user's native language. that's ridiculous.

frlmarty Wrote:But why can't the two book[s] at least stick to 1 meaning, I just don't get that.

Why should they? It's obvously a bad idea, since no sane person would try to learn the English keywords using the German book, but forcing a unnecessarily close translation certainly degrades its quality.

Just stop trolling and install the proper Greasemonkey script to use the German keywords on this site or buy the English book if you prefer the English keywords. Rambling about the failings of your improper and foolish usage of the book in this forum is totally pointless.

I believe the German keywords are in some cases vastly superior to the English ones and in all other cases at least as good. Mr Rauther made the right choice, when he decided to change some of them.

xaarg Wrote:Just stop trolling and install the proper Greasemonkey script to use the German keywords on this site

when you think I am troll then don't feed me. ;-)

not everyone is able to deal with the scripts ... I have to find someone around who helps me. IRL. ;-)

Personally, I don't think the keywords are that important. The core purpose of RTK is be able able to produce the kanji, read them and have a general sense of the meaning.

It is a bit like knowing that "eco"'s core meaning is home and "nom"'s is manage. Thus at its core "economics" means to manage the home but in fact it is used much more differently than that. With RTK you are learning that "eco" means home. If Heisig calls that castle instead, I don't think it is a big deal.

Once you master the kanji and read extensively in a Japanese-only context, those meanings will be replaced with a multitude of nuances depending on how the kanji is used; the English keywords will fall away just like the stories do and you will have a general sense of the meaning of each kanji, just like you do for "eco" in English.