ファブリス Wrote:In case you didn't notice the Index page, the forum has a specific area dedicated to Reviewing the Kanji Volume 1, and Reviewing the Kanji Volume 2 & 3. The RtK forum categories have been there since the forum's creation.

I did notice, but my link is specifically to the "Japanese Language" subforum of this site. I hope that's OK with you. In the same way I've linked to several language subforums of more general sites. My website is specifically about language, and doesn't cover learning methods, or discuss methods of remembering kanji. I also don't want to operate a general language forum myself, so the list of web forums is a way to give people opportunities to ask language-related questions.

yudantaiteki Wrote:The reason I say this is that before I discovered places like this forum, I had encountered several people in real life who were using RTK. All of them had the same misconceptions -- they had very little idea of what was involved in learning Japanese, but they had some vague idea that if they finished RTK 1 they would immediately be able to jump into reading Japanese and automatically learn vocab based on their knowledge of the English keywords. The book was publicly recommended at a panel during a JET conference I went to, and the person recommending the book said explicitly that if you learned the "meanings" from Heisig that was enough to start reading Japanese (he had not even finished half of RTK 1). So I'm not just making up this idea that people can be misled.

I can certainly top your story. The husband of a former colleague claimed he could read Japanese newspapers after completing Heisig's book, after six months' stay in Japan, with no other language study than Heisig's book.

You are describing the site, not your link. Perhaps you'd consider clarifying your description by indicating that the forum is not *limited to* RTK discussion? Mentioning that the forum includes a broader range of discussions is helpful information. As it stands, however, the wording is a bit ambiguous.

Edit: I've noticed it's very common for RTK critics to dredge up these types of anecdotal stories as evidence of flaws in RTK. I've never understood blaming a technique for the ignorance or braggadocio of a few users. I think your book review, Mr Bullock, includes an example of this. It's a shame really.

ファブリス Wrote:

Ben Bullock Wrote:Would you rate Tae Kim's forum above or below this one?

It wouldn't be a fair comparison, because this forum tends to focus on the why and the how of efficient Japanese language learning, with a special emphasis on kanji. People here love kanji instead of fearing them.

Maybe we could make a song to the tune of "Don't fear the reaper":
Don't fear the kanji
Baby take my hand
etc.

ファブリス Wrote:The community that revolves around this forum (so I mean the members who actively participate in the topics), tend to be smart and self reliable. This is not too surprising since they would be the kind of learners more likely to pick up a book like Remembering the Kanji.

I think you mean "self reliant" here. My opinion is that "Remembering the Kanji" is a dubious book, and the people who like it are often self-deluding and prone to exaggeration, but I'm not linking to that part of these forums, only the language part.

ファブリス Wrote:While the forum does not have a lot of native Japanese members, it has a lot of visitors who seem to be based in Japan. I'm too lazy to post Analytics screenshots here but the numbers go like this, out of 57000 monthly visits in January (rounded down for simplicity):
Northern America ~23000 visits
Eastern Asia ~9600 (8881 from Japan)
Northern Europe ~8000
Western Europe ~3990

Anything to do with Japanese language is going to get a lot of visits from Japan.
My site totals (across three sites) for January are about 15,000 visitors, with about 6,000 people from the US and about 2,000 from Japan. As a side note you might like to know that this thread on the forum gave me the second biggest traffic spike since I started using Google Analytics! The number one spike is still (embarrassingly enough) http://community.livejournal.com/aramath...96983.html though.

ファブリス Wrote:This may be similar on other Japanese language learning forums, though I suspect the ones with more newbies questions will attract a lot more non-Japan based members who are fans of Japanese culture, anime and so on.

A great part of the active people here who use "gimmicky" methods are based in Japan, work or study in Japan, and know their way around Japan. Some are even married in Japan

Good luck to them all.

Thora Wrote:You are describing the site, not your link. Perhaps you'd consider clarifying your description by indicating that the forum is not *limited to* RTK discussion? Mentioning that the forum includes a broader range of discussions is helpful information. As it stands, however, the wording is a bit ambiguous.

Ben Bullock Wrote:Part of a website devoted to James Heisig's dodgy kanji learning books. This forum is concerned with the language, not Heisig's books. As might be expected, many of the users seem to love gimmicky learning methods.

It's difficult to cling to vapid generalizations without them, isn't it? They're perfect for maintaining a defense of deadpan, minimal replies that reveals a narrow mind, but makes you feel, at least, that you're being mature and authoritative.

ruiner Wrote:

Thora Wrote:You are describing the site, not your link. Perhaps you'd consider clarifying your description by indicating that the forum is not *limited to* RTK discussion? Mentioning that the forum includes a broader range of discussions is helpful information. As it stands, however, the wording is a bit ambiguous.

Ben Bullock Wrote:Part of a website devoted to James Heisig's dodgy kanji learning books. This forum is concerned with the language, not Heisig's books. As might be expected, many of the users seem to love gimmicky learning methods.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...ds.svg.png

It's difficult to cling to vapid generalizations without them, isn't it? They're perfect for maintaining a defense of deadpan, minimal replies that reveals a narrow mind, but makes you feel, at least, that you're being mature and authoritative.

If you like trolling, I recommend "chatroulette.com" (very very NSFW). It's a scream.

Thora Wrote:You are describing the site, not your link. Perhaps you'd consider clarifying your description by indicating that the forum is not *limited to* RTK discussion? Mentioning that the forum includes a broader range of discussions is helpful information. As it stands, however, the wording is a bit ambiguous.

Fair point. I'm considering how to rewrite that review to better reflect the content of the forum. Please give me a little more time since I have other stuff which is a higher priority for me than the forum review list.

Edit:
Having thought about it for half an hour, I decided to just remove those reviews from the FAQ. They're just personal opinions so they don't really belong on something which calls itself a "Frequently Asked Questions", and if I'm brutally honest with you I find this kind of discussion we are involved in right here boring and pointless, and it also brings the trolls out of the woodwork (but please note I do not think Thora is a troll). I'd rather be fixing the errors in the list of romanizations or otherwise doing something which might serve some purpose or be useful, and I'd rather you spent your time studying your Heisig book than spend it trying to convince me that Heisig is the best thing since sliced bananas.

Thora Wrote:Edit: I've noticed it's very common for RTK critics to dredge up these types of anecdotal stories as evidence of flaws in RTK. I've never understood blaming a technique for the ignorance or braggadocio of a few users. I think your book review, Mr Bullock, includes an example of this. It's a shame really.

The fact that some users of the book certainly do tell exaggerated success stories actually does reflect badly on the book.

[posted before reading above] I would welcome the opportunity to perhaps widen your experience and understanding of RTK. I notice that you include a more positive review of RTK1 along with yours. Perhaps you'd consider including a response to your review? It is not clear to me whether you reject the component method of learning kanji, or simply reject the form it takes in Mr Heisig's book.

I was introduced to RTK1 in 1984. I was a skeptic for 2 years until I could no longer deny the tremendous results of my classmates. I've been observing the RTK debates since then. I studied Japanese at 3 universities and got involved in the whole "how best to teach Japanese concerns." I've observed the impact RTK has had on many students and self-learners. I can almost recognize the kind of the people who will and won't succeed with it. I understand it's strengths and limitations.

I include all this background nonsense, because I want you to know that I'm don't consider myself to be either "deluded or prone to exaggeration". I continue to recommend RTK1, with some minor qualifications.

I've encountered some folks who make silly claims about RTK1, but no more often than the silly claims made by other Japanese language beginners. We've all heard them. Critics tend to have selective perception though. Human nature, I guess.

When I was exploring online Japanese resources, I came upon your site and appreciated some of the information. I have read some of your contributions to various groups over the years. It is obvious you care about providing quality information to Japanese learners. I'd be grateful if you'd attempt to present more objective and more useful information about RTK1. As I see it, a FAQ site has a somewhat different purpose than a personal blog.

Ben Bullock Wrote:The fact that some users of the book certainly do tell exaggerated success stories actually does reflect badly on the book.

The book doesn't claim to teach Japanese. It is just a system of learning to write and recognize one meaning of a little over 2,000 Chinese characters. In that respect, the system works quickly and efficiently and the ability seems to be retained over long periods of time after the reviews have stopped. It is much more effective than the mindless copying of kanji hundreds of times as is the traditional method.
If people make outrageous claims of fluency in Japanese, it has nothing to do with RTK.

I have met many people who claimed to be fluent in Japanese after taking only one year of it in highschool and couldn't say much more than "watashi wa john desu" in a horrible accent. Beginners always over-estimate their ability, regardless of how they learn.

That said I think RTK isn't the best way to begin Japanese studies. I think it's better to tackle it after one already has a foundation in the basics. If they are studying in a class, that probably means after second year (Genki 2) is done. That is the time when most people who aren't serious quit studying the language anyways. If they are doing extra studying on the side (as they should) maybe they can do it after first year and then test out of second.

Jarvik7 Wrote:I have met many people who claimed to be fluent in Japanese after taking only one year of it in highschool and couldn't say much more than "watashi wa john desu" in a horrible accent. Beginners always over-estimate their ability, regardless of how they learn.

That said I think RTK isn't the best way to begin Japanese studies. I think it's better to tackle it after one already has a foundation in the basics. If they are studying in a class, that probably means after second year (Genki 2) is done. That is the time when most people who aren't serious quit studying the language anyways. If they are doing extra studying on the side (as they should) maybe they can do it after first year and then test out of second.

I disagree, I think RTK is so lively, easy, motivating, and impetus-giving, it's best to integrate it into one's self-study from the onset, breaking up the foundational core into complementary groupings. ;p

@Ben Bullock

I would like to go to the link you provided, but like you, I have other high priorities in my life. As you asked Thora--that you need time to rethink your site's review about this site, because you are busy with things like posting in this thread about your site and this site--please give me more time, because I am busy posting this comment. I hope that is okay with you.

ruiner Wrote:@Ben Bullock

I would like to go to the link you provided, but like you, I have other high priorities in my life. As you asked Thora--that you need time to rethink your site's review about this site, because you are busy with things like posting in this thread about your site and this site--please give me more time, because I am busy posting this comment. I hope that is okay with you.

That is quite OK with me.

BB Wrote:I'd rather be fixing the errors in the list of romanizations or otherwise doing something which might serve some purpose or be useful,

Cheap shot?

Ben Bullock Wrote:I'd rather you spent your time studying your Heisig book than spend it trying to convince me that Heisig is the best thing since sliced bananas.

How did things go from "Heisig is not dodgy/ these methods are not gimmicky" to "Heisig is the best thing since sliced bread"?

They've only asked for a fair review of this website.

J7 Wrote:I have met many people who claimed to be fluent in Japanese after taking only one year of it in highschool and couldn't say much more than "watashi wa john desu" in a horrible accent. Beginners always over-estimate their ability, regardless of how they learn.

Blast those dodgy textbooks and those gimmicky classrooms, right?

nest0r Wrote:I disagree, I think RTK is so lively, easy, motivating, and impetus-giving, it's best to integrate it into one's self-study from the onset, breaking up the foundational core into complementary groupings.

Seeing as how only a small percentage of people who study the language actually reach "fluency" ... I fully agree with nest0r, here. I fully agree with Jarvik.

Makes no sense right?

Neither does finding obscure references to people who've tried and failed at learning Japanese, or blaming their failure on a book. Think of the number of people who take Japanese courses everyday, every year. How many fail? How many go beyond the 1st or second year? I'm sure one could pull out many obscure cases and use them as reasons for classrooms being the problem. This teacher is slow, that textbook is confusing. It was too far from my dorm room. The problem isn't a classroom or a book. It's people.

Some people are willing to go the distance (no matter what), others aren't, and some people believe they are fluent after reading through RTK (or insert desired textbook here).

That's what I've learned today.

*resists urge to press button*

Thora Wrote:When I was exploring online Japanese resources, I came upon your site and appreciated some of the information. I have read some of your contributions to various groups over the years. It is obvious you care about providing quality information to Japanese learners.

I'm glad you appreciated the information. But, I haven't been involved in any other language discussion groups than the Usenet group sci.lang.japan, which I was in from 1994 onwards. I sporadically posted to some web forums a few years ago under pseudonyms, and I recently joined most of the web forums listed at the page in question under my real name in December 2009 and January 2010.

Thora Wrote:I notice that you include a more positive review of RTK1 along with yours. Perhaps you'd consider including a response to your review? It is not clear to me whether you reject the component method of learning kanji, or simply reject the form it takes in Mr Heisig's book.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. There are some book review pages related to the frequently asked questions site, but like the forums page they are very low traffic (less than twenty visitors a day), and almost all of the traffic comes from links from the main FAQ pages. The reviews are mostly Usenet posts. If you don't like my review of the Heisig books there, a collection of very old Usenet posts from more than ten years ago which I'm not sure I like that much (I wouldn't recommend Henshall's book these days) the best thing you could do is to ignore it rather than point it out, since pointing it out will just make it more visible.

Anyway, if you want to write a review of some book and add it to those pages you are welcome to do so (there are "log in" and "register" links on the top right). But, I should warn you that the website is based on home-brewed software, the only people who have used the registration so far are spammers, and despite asking nobody was willing to help me test the interface, so you might have to struggle a bit with it. If you prefer you can just email me your book review and I'll add it.

BB Wrote:[...]I decided to just remove those reviews from the FAQ. They're just personal opinions so they don't really belong on something which calls itself a "Frequently Asked Questions",[...]

fwiw, I think the idea of a list of Japanese language forums on the FAQ is great. It's exactly what some people searching online would like to find. Perhaps even more immediately useful than books. I just think it could be a bit more objective overall.

Kazelee: Not sure you're supposed to press the button immediately after your own post. See "The Manual", section 17324 (d) (iv) under "Moderator Gets Last Word". But yeah, it's all about people....and methods. hehe

btw Post editing can create some strange results, eh? If someone defangs their post, a later poster can end up looking like a volatile nut. :-)

Thora Wrote:btw Post editing can create some strange results, eh? If someone defangs their post, a later poster can end up looking like a volatile nut. :-)

grrrrrr. raaaah! *flails clawed fingers and foams at mouth*

ruiner Wrote:

Thora Wrote:btw Post editing can create some strange results, eh? If someone defangs their post, a later poster can end up looking like a volatile nut. :-)

grrrrrr. raaaah! *flails clawed fingers and foams at mouth*

So when are you going to start acting like a volatile nut?

6 pages? Seriously? How much troll food do you guys have?

Anyways using the stock standard traditional kanji learning method as seen in Japanese schools (the only place where it can actually work) since 1994 I guess you'd be halfway through by now? Only another 6 years to go before you've mastered all the jouyou kanji then. Good luck Ben.

LOL I met a Uni student who's majoring in Japanese and is just starting his second year. He came along to kanji club where we use a variation on Heisig, i.e Mnemonics are used but only true etymologies and the order of the mnemonic goes "keyword, first component, second component ect". And all he had to say was "I wish they taught it like this in Uni".

haha. Well traditional learning methods take a very very long time. Plus you will definitely forget alot of things along the way. Since the SRS is a system used to never get any information (Memorized majority of the information), it's definitely more effective in terms of time any day.

blackmacros Wrote:

ruiner Wrote:

Thora Wrote:btw Post editing can create some strange results, eh? If someone defangs their post, a later poster can end up looking like a volatile nut. :-)

grrrrrr. raaaah! *flails clawed fingers and foams at mouth*

So when are you going to start acting like a volatile nut?

@blackmacros: My evil plan is continuing to bear fruit, another person driven so mad they can't recognize volatile nuts.

@RTK: RTK isn't for learning writing/meaning/etc. of kanji. It's a major, wildly successful and useful tool for learning vocabulary. I don't know of anyone who has used RTK and begun learning words who won't say the same. Anyone. *glares around and shakes fist*

mezbup Wrote:6 pages? Seriously? How much troll food do you guys have?

Anyways using the stock standard traditional kanji learning method as seen in Japanese schools (the only place where it can actually work) since 1994 I guess you'd be halfway through by now? Only another 6 years to go before you've mastered all the jouyou kanji then. Good luck Ben.

Thanks.

Ben Bullock Wrote:Thanks.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/127470...b7f4d6.jpg

z0mg can haz pdfz plz?

Ben Bullock Wrote:

mezbup Wrote:6 pages? Seriously? How much troll food do you guys have?

Anyways using the stock standard traditional kanji learning method as seen in Japanese schools (the only place where it can actually work) since 1994 I guess you'd be halfway through by now? Only another 6 years to go before you've mastered all the jouyou kanji then. Good luck Ben.

Thanks.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/127470...b7f4d6.jpg

lol 2006 edition. 時代遅れよ

Ben Bullock Wrote:

mezbup Wrote:6 pages? Seriously? How much troll food do you guys have?

Anyways using the stock standard traditional kanji learning method as seen in Japanese schools (the only place where it can actually work) since 1994 I guess you'd be halfway through by now? Only another 6 years to go before you've mastered all the jouyou kanji then. Good luck Ben.

Thanks.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/127470...b7f4d6.jpg

Nice image, my first comment was that it was probably from some old school traditionalist conversation, based on anecdotal RTKers, from literally 2006 or so, and how it reflected your rigid stance and inability to process the actual developments on the forum, and how this in turn reflected the stagnant mindset of other condescending critics who spent 20000 years learning Japanese through older methods and feel others should do the same. A quick Googling and I find this: http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci....00411.html - How long have you been trotting that image out to people who want to try Heisig? ;p