chamcham Wrote:mangahelpers.com -> Browse Manga -> [JP] RAWs
mangahelpers.com -> Read Online -> [JP] RAWs

Hell, yeah!!! My No. 1 site for Gantz manga!

arch9443 Wrote:But how do I go about getting my hands on JP Manga? I read that Khatz talks about buying things off of Amazon JP. Can I buy from there with a U.S. paypal account/debit card? or do I need to do something special?

The 'where should I buy manga?' question comes up a lot. This thread has some answers. Avoid Amazon unless you're actually in Japan, because their overseas shipping charges are extortionate.

Ah cool thanks a bunch.

nest0r Wrote:Your comments weren't particularly helpful and even came off silly, shallow, and pointless, but thanks for participating. ;p

And the first part of your response was completely nonsensical. You contradicted your own stated understanding of what you were replying to within just a few lines, revealing that you are simply trying to string together an impressive looking paragraph without comprehending what you are even saying. It might fool some people, including yourself, but I don't fall for that crap and it is one of my pet peeves to call out.

And if you don't want to have to infer what someone means from a simple comment then you probably shouldn't craft a multi-paragraph response to call it "silly".

activeaero Wrote:

nest0r Wrote:Your comments weren't particularly helpful and even came off silly, shallow, and pointless, but thanks for participating. ;p

And the first part of your response was completely nonsensical. You contradicted your own stated understanding of what you were replying to within just a few lines, revealing that you are simply trying to string together an impressive looking paragraph without comprehending what you are even saying. It might fool some people, including yourself, but I don't fall for that crap and it is one of my pet peeves to call out.

And if you don't want to have to infer what someone means from a simple comment then you probably shouldn't craft a multi-paragraph response to call it "silly".

I didn't contradict a single thing, I merely pointed out the pointlessness of what you stated, pointed out that even within that pointlessness it was wrong, and then proceeded to expand upon the theme, on topic. You can write as many comments as you like attacking my intelligence and knowledge and pretend it's because you're just so incisive and have a 'pet peeve', but I doubt anyone reading your comment to wccrawford and then my own comment, and your follow-up, will see anything but someone (hint: you) who wrote a half-assed comment and then tried to defend it in a snarky quote-war fashion that only made them look more foolish.

You're generally more intelligent and mature, activeaero, perhaps you're feeling unwell? It's not a good idea to channel it into forum stupidity.

Edit: And apologies to others reading this if I seem harsh, I'm simply taken aback by activeaero's attitude.

BoccKob Wrote:That's odd, because I know I could speak coherent English before I learned to read, so I couldn't possibly have read a grammar book then. HOW DID IT HAPPEN?! :O

You don't have to use a grammar book to study grammar.

I interact with children between the ages of 5-12 on a daily basis. The brightest kid is a 6 year old who can barely form coherent sentences. His sentences are basic at best and he can't really articulate complex ideas. And yet he's a grade ahead of the other kids.

He reads everyday. He asks me questions about grammar almost every day. Sometimes he asks me one question, then asks it again a few weeks later. I somehow doubt you're smarter than this kid (in general), but I could be wrong.

Either way, being able to use "and" and "but" doesn't mean you have mastery of the language you are using. Otherwise we'd all be fluent.

Neither does being able to use sarcasm, BTW.

So, hey, I'll be glad to answer any questions you have about grammar when you ask them in the future.

I agree that even though we might not actively study grammar(i.e. let's say read a book about grammar) but we all have in some way. Through sentences/decoding of those sentences to understand the points. Grammar is good to go through at least a few times, it will help your understanding excel further. Some of my friends have said(a real close one), said that my grammar in English is pretty bad at times. He said that it's nothing to worry about though. As long as you just review the basics you should be fine with avoiding those mistakes. So no matter what it will help you in the future to avoid making simple mistakes and possible major ones. I'm going onto Japanese grammar right now for all JLPT levels now. I'm sure this will help my understanding excel to the next level. (Nothing crazy just understanding the points more thoroughly/using monolingual sources,etc

Do you guys know of a good book for cramming grammar? Or/And a good book which explains the difference of similar grammar (mitai, you, rashii)?
Going to Yamasa in a month and I HAVE to get into Intermediate level, means all JLPT3-stuff. I just rushed through MINNA, maybe I'll go back to old Genki, but it might get boring.

Ah, and does anyone know about those admission tests of Yamasa, and the interview, do you happen to have one of those tests?

I would get 完全マスター3級 日本語能力試験文法問題対策:
http://www.amazon.co.jp/完全マスター3級-日本語能力試験...4883193543

which has all you need to know for JLPT3

and A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar to help you understand it:
http://www.amazon.co.jp/Dictionary-Basic...4789004546

Personally, I would say just finish RTK 1/2/3 before getting into Grammar. I only know extremely basic Grammar myself, but it's really simple once it begins making sense. Learn all the Kanji necessary before getting into Grammar so that you don't have to worry about learning characters anymore. Some basic things about grammar are the SOV(Subject, Object, Verb) sentence structure. You probably already might have found this out, but every sentence revolves around that structure. In order to read a sentence you have to do a 100% literal translation of all words in the sentence. Then guess the sentence's meaning and rearrange it into a proper sentence. For extremely basic sentences it's simple if you keep the SOV structure in mind. Example:

ほんはどこですか：Hon(Means book) wa(Particle marks that noun that precedes it is the topic of the sentence). doko(Means where) desu(is) ka(Particle goes at the end of the sentence. Turns a sentence into a question). Overall, the sentence in romaji is Hon wa doko desu ka.

The は(Wa particle) indicates that the word Hon which comes before it is the topic of the sentence. Hon means book. So, a book is the subject of the sentence. Next is doko. Which means where. Doko is the object of the sentence. Since, while it is not a object itself...It's referring to the location of the object of the sentence. Last, but not least is desu. Which means is. That would be the Verb of the sentence since it's giving a state of identity. Ultimately, the 100% literal translation of this sentence is:

Book where is?

That's not a proper sentence though. However, the next step is to rearrange the 100% literal translation into a proper sentence. You can guess that the sentence is about asking where a book is. So, you could take that and rearrange it into something like:

Where is the book?

This turns it into a proper sentence and it makes sense. Essentially, this is how the SOV structure and absolute basic grammar of Japanese works. You get a 100% literal translation of a sentence that generally isn't a proper one, then rearrange into a proper sentence. So, just to give one final outline:

Japanese:ほんはどこですか
Romaji:Hon wa doko desu ka.
English Literal Translation:Book where is?
Proper English Translation:Where is the book?
Words used:

ほん（Hon):Book
は(Wa Particle):Marks the noun that precedes it as the topic of the sentence. Since Hon came before Wa...Hon is the topic of the sentence.
どこ(Doko):Where
です(Desu):Is
か(Ka Particle):Added to the end of a sentence to turn the sentence into a question.

Since that was extremely basic Grammar I explained you might already know what I explained, but I'm sure someone out there will find this useful.

I believe that when you are entering a new sentence that you don't understand the grammar for, you should look up that grammar point up in a dictionary and study it a little.

However, learn the sentence without thinking about the grammar.

Do not try to learn how to speak and form sentences using grammar points, for I have learned that grammar rules are often wide generalizations that often have exceptions. Maybe this is just English, but think about it.

"Add -ed to make a verb past form"
I played in the game.
I goed to the game.
I runed to the game.
I eated to the game.

zachandhobbes Wrote:"Add -ed to make a verb past form"
I played in the game.
I goed to the game.
I runed to the game.
I eated to the game.

you're following an incorrect grammar point...

the point was that what works for one thing may not always work for another thing. That was bad example because in Japanese the past forms of verbs are very consistent.

Think about it when you're using particles though. Like when to use "で" and when to use ”に" or "へ".

Michael1919 Wrote:In order to read a sentence you have to do a 100% literal translation of all words in the sentence. Then guess the sentence's meaning and rearrange it into a proper sentence.

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or not? That's great if the sentence is so simple that you can totally ignore the grammar and still reliably understand the meaning. There aren't many possible meanings of a sentence essentially containing only the words "where" and "book". Essentially you're just doing "ほんはどこですか" -> ("ほん", "どこ") -> ("Book", "Where") -> "Where is the book?". If that sort of approach were sufficient to understand language, grammar wouldn't exist and we'd all just blurt out unordered lists of nouns and unconjugated verbs. The stuff between keywords does matter and can utterly change the meaning of the sentence.

Using your approach, could you explain what this means?　”問題あるまい” (potentially a bad example if you use rikaichan lol)

Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying you can't learn a language without studying it's grammar formally, but don't assume your method will continue to work once you get off the beginner level.

zigmonty Wrote:

Michael1919 Wrote:In order to read a sentence you have to do a 100% literal translation of all words in the sentence. Then guess the sentence's meaning and rearrange it into a proper sentence.

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or not?

Yeah, this does sound awfully rigid and absolute!

You *have* to do it this way in order to read a sentence? Why?

It has to be a *100% literal* translation of each word? Why?

Then I have to look at these words and *guess* the meaning?

I dunno. Well, if someone here can give me a second positive opinion on this technique, maybe I'll try it out, but I won't hold my breath.

Mushi Wrote:

zigmonty Wrote:

Michael1919 Wrote:In order to read a sentence you have to do a 100% literal translation of all words in the sentence. Then guess the sentence's meaning and rearrange it into a proper sentence.

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or not?

Yeah, this does sound awfully rigid and absolute!

You *have* to do it this way in order to read a sentence? Why?

It has to be a *100% literal* translation of each word? Why?

Then I have to look at these words and *guess* the meaning?

I dunno. Well, if someone here can give me a second positive opinion on this technique, maybe I'll try it out, but I won't hold my breath.

I gotta agree here. I mean, shit, I'm practically a total beginner still and I already find myself trying to move away from "translating" sentences. Not even just "100% literal translations" but just translating in general. I'm not studying to learn what this stuff means in English; I wanna know what it means in Japanese without using English as a crutch. I mean, I'm certainly not saying that I don't translate stuff when I need to, but I'm actively trying to move away from the "translation" business. If I can understand it in Japanese and not English, I consider it to be a good thing. Have I been doing it wrong all along?!?

Maybe I'm crazy?

Offshore Wrote:I gotta agree here. I mean, shit, I'm practically a total beginner still and I already find myself trying to move away from "translating" sentences. Not even just "100% literal translations" but just translating in general. I'm not studying to learn what this stuff means in English; I wanna know what it means in Japanese without using English as a crutch. I mean, I'm certainly not saying that I don't translate stuff when I need to, but I'm actively trying to move away from the "translation" business. If I can understand it in Japanese and not English, I consider it to be a good thing. Have I been doing it wrong all along?!?

Maybe I'm crazy?

Sounds pretty sane to me. I try to do the same. As long as you actually *are* understanding it and not just tricking yourself into thinking you are. The "understand a few keywords and guess the meaning" "method" isn't limited to those who translate into english. You can do it monolingual too!

I generally don't say i can understand something unless i understand everything in the sentence and *why* it's in there. Once i start guessing, i lower my confidence in my understanding considerably. Sure, getting the gist of something is still valuable, but it isn't the same as understanding.

I sometimes think it's fun to pretend English has rigid grammar rules like Japanese.

Like for example, nominalizing question words
Japanese
なぜー＞なぜか
だれー＞だれか
なにー＞なにか
どこー＞どこか
いつー＞いつか
English
why->somewhy somehow
who->somewho someone
what->somewhat something
where->somewhere
when->somewhen sometime or someday

I'll second the KM old level 3 book that Caviano linked to. It's actually really good for getting you to the lower intermediate level, or wherever old JLPT3 would spit you out. Some EN here and there for grammar points, not sentences. (ISBN 978-4-88319-354-7 if you can't find it at amazon.co.jp)

If you need to know more than that, then there's a really good review book by UNICOM out for grammar that covers up to N3 (sort of midway between the old 3 and N2). It has a very brief review of conjugations, then dives right into the usual "how do I use this short phrase" kind of stuff. EN/KOR/CHN translations of grammar and examples. (ISBN 978-4-89689-469-1)

After trying to look up a lot of N2 level expressions in the "Basic->Advanced Dictionary of Japanese Grammar" (ABDJG) Series, I can't really recommend them for anyone trying to study for the JLPT. I can only find about 50-60% of what I need for the exam in all 3 books. It's very frustrating, considering how much they charge for the books. (It cost me well over $130 for all 3 in the end.)

Even though the どんな時 grammar dictionary's definitions are much terser, and sometimes less helpful, at least they exist and provide info when you need it. I buy other review books to cross reference and find different explanations of grammar points that the ABDJG series just doesn't have for whatever reason. どんな時 will get you in the door from an understanding point of view. (ISBN 978-4-7574-1235-4) and it's dirt cheap in comparison. EN/KOR/CHN translations of grammar points, not sentences. (2800 yen.)

If you can stand not having training wheels, 日本語文型辞典 is also *really* good, but no EN help at all. Also much better than ABDJG, in that you'll find everything you need in it, sometimes with long explanations, sometimes not. Entries start with example sentences to give you an idea of how the grammar point works, then goes into explanations. All JP. (ISBN 4-87424-154-9)

And don't worry-- at Yamasa, they will sort you out pretty thoroughly as soon as you get off of the train. (That's what happened to me.)

*How* you learn grammar is up to you. 100人、100色。 (Isn't that the saying?) Everyone has a different style. As long as you stick to your approach and do the work, that will probably be as effective as anything else.

rich_f Wrote:After trying to look up a lot of N2 level expressions in the "Basic->Advanced Dictionary of Japanese Grammar" (ABDJG) Series, I can't really recommend them for anyone trying to study for the JLPT. I can only find about 50-60% of what I need for the exam in all 3 books. It's very frustrating, considering how much they charge for the books. (It cost me well over $130 for all 3 in the end.)

Mmm, but in my experience they generally cover the points that are most likely to be hard to pick up. 日本語文型辞典 has a better breadth of coverage but less depth. (Also I find on the odd occasions when something has me completely stumped that it's reassuring to have an English explanation rather than also wondering whether I've misinterpreted one in Japanese.) So you're right that they don't work as a sole reference for JLPT use, and they are a bit pricy, but I wouldn't have wanted to be without them.

Just wanted to add that Manga Helpers is dead
They removed all of their RAWs and scanlations out of respect for the artists.

For now I'm just using nyaatorrents and a few other sites, but if anyone has some links to other good manga sites, please share.

Thanks for all the tips, I'll probably go with 完全マスター and Genki, maybe I can get some more production cards in my deck too^^. I pretty much know what all grammar means, I just have to learn to use it in 4 weeks.
I did some research on Yamasa tests, and I'm not so worried about the written test, I' ll probably manage that (passed JLPT after all..), but the interview... I read they want to hear you use special grammar, and if you use other grammar than the required it's like fail... I have no clue how they question you, and if it's easy to guess what they want from you :S
I really couldn't stand being in an upper beginner class for 3 months, it would bore me to death.

Based on how everyone responded to the post I made...I'm still at square one in terms of grammar. It seems I still haven't really figured out how to go about reading sentences. Still, at least I got corrected before it was too late and I figured out that the method I've been using wouldn't work by that point. Just wonder though, how can one exactly go about reading without using that method? Do those of you who are more advanced just read/know the words of a sentence then just automatically figure out what it means based on the words of the sentence? Otherwise...The only way I can really guess anyone else understands the Grammar is by exactly memorizing phrases/sentences. I don't know I'm just confused now lol. X_X Either way, thanks to everyone who corrected me.

lanval Wrote:I did some research on Yamasa tests, and I'm not so worried about the written test, I' ll probably manage that (passed JLPT after all..), but the interview... I read they want to hear you use special grammar, and if you use other grammar than the required it's like fail...

I think mostly they just want to know how well you can actually use the grammar you've shown you can recognise in a written test; so if you're describing a room do you use ておく and てある and まま and so on, or do you fall back to totally basic "the window is open. the box is on the table." patterns?

So if you want to prepare then you're probably best off making sure you have all the minna-no-nihongo level stuff completely solid, for production as well as recognition. If you don't do much speaking at the moment then try to get some practice in at least of actually using the MnN grammar; if all else fails try talking out loud to a teddy bear :-)

Michael1919, there's a book called "Making Sense of Japanese" by Jay Rubin that I think has some really helpful advice on reading sentences. But I think it's more useful when your grammar is at least at an intermediate level, or when you're starting to parse sentences written for native speakers.

I'm advanced enough now that for the most part I understand the syntax of a sentence automatically even if I need to look up a few words. Until I got to that point, the key points in understanding a sentence were:

1) Where are the particles? What do you know based on the particles about what the subject, topic, object, and/or location of the sentence are?
2) Where is the main verb?
3) Are there any relative clauses, and what do they describe?

#1, you can find just by locating the particles. #2, almost always, is right at the end. #3, any verb that comes directly in front of a noun is a good signpost for a relative clause, though there are other kinds of clauses too. Any verb that comes before the very end of the sentence is most likely not the main verb of the sentence, but part of a dependent or independent clause.

You don't need to understand the words of the sentence, you need to understand the syntax, like that poem Jabberwocky:

’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

You don't know what slithy toves are, but they're the subject of the sentence; and you don't know what the wabe is, but that's the location; and you don't know what gimble is, but you know that it's one of the main verbs of the sentence. And you know the difference between "man bites dog" and "dog bites man" based, not on the words, but on the grammar of the sentence. It's much the same thing with Japanese.