nest0r Wrote:You will be writing them correctly, and you do not need a native Japanese person there to correct you.

You learn handwriting characters by writing characters by hand. You learn handwriting Japanese by writing Japanese by hand. Recognition benefits in both cases. I agree with this version of your last two sentences. ;p

I take it you have not been graded on your writing by a strict instructor who grades based on Japanese schoolkids standards.

I have. It sucks.

RTK does not help you write like a native person, it just helps you learn to read them. A reasonable strict Japanese teacher tears the RTK written forms apart, largely because Heisig takes many shortcuts, 9ignoring almost all the distinctions between the seventeen specific different strokes) and bases his writing forms on the typeset forms, and not the handwritten forms. Because he is teaching you to read not write, and he is teaching adults not children.

I can correct Japanese people on Kanji, but I cannot get 100% on a quiz that a Japanese third grader can ace because I did not learn to write them native style.

You yourself may have teachers that are grade you based on the fact you are not Japanese. But if you are graded by Japanese standards (the ones that Japanese kids are graded by), RTK will give bad results, because those standards require a whole bunch of stuff that RTK simply ignores.

(To good effect I might add. I wanted to learn them now, not spend 12 years in school. I just will never get them 'right'. I will get them close enough for reading.)

kame3 Wrote:With all due respect to (some of) the people above, you do NOT need to write the kanji. I did RTK without writing a single kanji down, because I think it is simply not worth it. So I used RTK only to be able to read and understand Kanji and I would recommend it wholeheartedly. The thing is that it helps you sort of get used to the kanji.

I'm curious - how did you do your RTK reviews, if you didn't write anything down? Were you reviewing keyword->kanji, and just visualising the kanji? Or were you reviewing kanji->keyword?

mezbup Wrote:If all you want to do is learn to read RTK is unnecessary. Just start a vocab deck, get rikaichan and away you go. The more you learn to read, the easier it gets to distinguish similar kanji because you'll recognize them by their readings.

There's about 700 I didn't study from RTK that I know how to read no problems cos I've just come across them in the wild and added the vocab to my vocab deck. Hence I know that you do not need RTK for just learning to read.

My experience was rather different: I did RTKLite, then started learning from a large vocab deck which is not limited to RTKLite kanji. I find it *much* easier to retain the vocab which only has RTKLite kanji. Vocab using non-RTKLite characters goes into my short-term memory fine, but then I don't retain it long-term.

fugu68 Wrote:

mezbup Wrote:If all you want to do is learn to read RTK is unnecessary. Just start a vocab deck, get rikaichan and away you go. The more you learn to read, the easier it gets to distinguish similar kanji because you'll recognize them by their readings.

There's about 700 I didn't study from RTK that I know how to read no problems cos I've just come across them in the wild and added the vocab to my vocab deck. Hence I know that you do not need RTK for just learning to read.

My experience was rather different: I did RTKLite, then started learning from a large vocab deck which is not limited to RTKLite kanji. I find it *much* easier to retain the vocab which only has RTKLite kanji. Vocab using non-RTKLite characters goes into my short-term memory fine, but then I don't retain it long-term.

Yeah, i'm the same. I was originally learning words with non-RTK1 kanji just using an anki vocab deck but i struggled until i started RTKing those kanji. Well, i did ok, but i've noticed the words stick a lot better if i know the kanji well. YMMV.

fugu68 Wrote:

kame3 Wrote:With all due respect to (some of) the people above, you do NOT need to write the kanji. I did RTK without writing a single kanji down, because I think it is simply not worth it. So I used RTK only to be able to read and understand Kanji and I would recommend it wholeheartedly. The thing is that it helps you sort of get used to the kanji.

I'm curious - how did you do your RTK reviews, if you didn't write anything down? Were you reviewing keyword->kanji, and just visualising the kanji? Or were you reviewing kanji->keyword?

I'm doing the same; I found it took way too much time to write kanji down. I do take the full time to reconstruct the kanji image in my mind, or roughly sketching it on the screen with the mouse pointer, in the beginning. Later on, if I just can remember the primitives and I know I know I can construct them, I skip even the imaginary drawing to speed things up. Of course I tried drawing the kanji, but my drawings always come out so disproportionate that I thought it better to take some calligraphy course if I'd ever want to write kanji with skill.

By the way, I'm also doing core6000 (the kore deck) sorted by RTK kanji along with Heisig, and that works fine and is more fun to me than just doing RTK. That might be an idea for somebody. I did find Heisig essential in my being able to digest the kanji-vocab faster.

kapalama Wrote:

nest0r Wrote:You will be writing them correctly, and you do not need a native Japanese person there to correct you.

You learn handwriting characters by writing characters by hand. You learn handwriting Japanese by writing Japanese by hand. Recognition benefits in both cases. I agree with this version of your last two sentences. ;p

I take it you have not been graded on your writing by a strict instructor who grades based on Japanese schoolkids standards.

I have. It sucks.

RTK does not help you write like a native person, it just helps you learn to read them. A reasonable strict Japanese teacher tears the RTK written forms apart, largely because Heisig takes many shortcuts, 9ignoring almost all the distinctions between the seventeen specific different strokes) and bases his writing forms on the typeset forms, and not the handwritten forms. Because he is teaching you to read not write, and he is teaching adults not children.

I can correct Japanese people on Kanji, but I cannot get 100% on a quiz that a Japanese third grader can ace because I did not learn to write them native style.

You yourself may have teachers that are grade you based on the fact you are not Japanese. But if you are graded by Japanese standards (the ones that Japanese kids are graded by), RTK will give bad results, because those standards require a whole bunch of stuff that RTK simply ignores.

(To good effect I might add. I wanted to learn them now, not spend 12 years in school. I just will never get them 'right'. I will get them close enough for reading.)

Heisig, so far as I know, did not set out prioritizing writing as a tool for recognition--that is, it's simply 'how to write'. For the most part, arguments of improving recognition through writing were I think incidental to his method if made at all. I think folks are only just now coming around to appreciate the value of it for recognition. ;p

There's no Platonic ideal for what 'native kanji' should look like. Only the common representation of it in text (the bulk of which at this point is typed, I imagine). All that matters is that you learn the kanji in a logical, internally consistent way from the radicals up (specific stroke order isn't important except insofar as it's internally consistent esp. while you're developing 'motor programs' for muscle memory). Produce them in a legible manner based on whatever commonplace template or set of templates you're using and practice over time and you will attain whatever easy grace or aesthetic you are aiming for. Do that and I can't imagine anyone but some trad prescriptivist instructor finding fault, and I would bet that they'd find the same and in the same amount in any given cross section of Japanese society, and in any case their views would be irrelevant except on a basic level, learning the rudimentary criteria of which you can replace with RTK or whatever.

I do think stuff like what rich_f is into can help 'improve' or rather hone handwriting for those interested in finding a specialised conception of it and focusing efforts in that direction. ペン字 looks interesting. I imagine the bulk of decorative 'improvements' (and not necessarily towards legibility) to be the results of effort in technique rather than meeting the ideals of a particular form.

KanjiDevourer Wrote:

fugu68 Wrote:

kame3 Wrote:With all due respect to (some of) the people above, you do NOT need to write the kanji. I did RTK without writing a single kanji down, because I think it is simply not worth it. So I used RTK only to be able to read and understand Kanji and I would recommend it wholeheartedly. The thing is that it helps you sort of get used to the kanji.

I'm curious - how did you do your RTK reviews, if you didn't write anything down? Were you reviewing keyword->kanji, and just visualising the kanji? Or were you reviewing kanji->keyword?

I'm doing the same; I found it took way too much time to write kanji down. I do take the full time to reconstruct the kanji image in my mind, or roughly sketching it on the screen with the mouse pointer, in the beginning. Later on, if I just can remember the primitives and I know I know I can construct them, I skip even the imaginary drawing to speed things up. Of course I tried drawing the kanji, but my drawings always come out so disproportionate that I thought it better to take some calligraphy course if I'd ever want to write kanji with skill.

By the way, I'm also doing core6000 (the kore deck) sorted by RTK kanji along with Heisig, and that works fine and is more fun to me than just doing RTK. That might be an idea for somebody. I did find Heisig essential in my being able to digest the kanji-vocab faster.

If you're satisfied with that level of sensorimotor encoding that's cool, though I'd recommend you be certain to ground that fundamental level as motor memory, from what I've read and especially noted in that article with regards to handwriting, is robust once established.

Personally the only time I actively trace strokes or write kanji is when I sense a certain fuzziness during reps. Ditto for whole words, sentences in terms of assuring myself flow and cohesion are easily generated across a length of time on a horizontal line, though that's more or less ornamental, methinks.

fugu68 Wrote:

kame3 Wrote:With all due respect to (some of) the people above, you do NOT need to write the kanji. I did RTK without writing a single kanji down, because I think it is simply not worth it. So I used RTK only to be able to read and understand Kanji and I would recommend it wholeheartedly. The thing is that it helps you sort of get used to the kanji.

I'm curious - how did you do your RTK reviews, if you didn't write anything down? Were you reviewing keyword->kanji, and just visualising the kanji? Or were you reviewing kanji->keyword?

My reply here is a little overdue I guess, but nonetheless: I was reviewing keyword -> kanji, and just visualising the kanji.

Thanks for all the replies!

After reading everyone's posts, I've decided to just go through the whole thing, and practice writing the characters down too. There's no harm in doing so, even if it takes more time that way. (:

Anyway, I have one more question:
When I review a kanji and I don't know the answer, I select "No."
Then afterwards, I study the failed kanji and review them again, after which I will almost always remember them, so I select "Yes."

Is this the right way to do it?
'Cause I think I'm doing something wrong, seeing how I haven't had to do one review yet since I did the first one more than 24 hours ago. (I've reviewed 150 kanji one time so far, except of course for the ones I failed initially.)

Thanks!

I think you're doing well. I don't think there is any rule for the failed kanji, that's why you can review them immediatly.
Either you can use the failed kanji reviewing as restudying session, or consider it's like a new review session attached to a new day.

As for me, either i re-do the failed kanji two-three hours after my last review, or 24h hours after (in most cases). It depends on the time I have : if I know i won't have time the next day, I prefer reviewing my failed kanji quickly.

Since the ex-failed kanji are going to be asked again after a short time, I think it doesn't change a lot .

My only advice is : do as you feel the best.

yay another Dutchie! more dutchies are needed !

I have finished the book some while ago. I would say it defiantly helped to write and recognize them way better with the help of this book. I used Anki as review software though instead of the site but that is a personal choice.

You probably need to look up the meaning of some keywords later in the book. At least I did! But most of them won't be any problem x)

Somewhat related to this

I originally posted this one in thread: Benefits of RTK

Seiska Wrote:Its pretty obvious why Heisig recommends people to do RTK1 seperately from other Japanese learning. Like I said, RTK1 basically builds up a giant spreadsheet of kanji in to your brain and gives them all a name (keyword).

There are plenty of similar kanji with similar meanings and looks, and if you are learning them trough other sources while doing RTK1 you might learn other meanings for the same kanji. This might result in what I would call "double naming". double named kanji might result in confusion when the name conflicts with a new kanji teached later in the book, these are often tried to avoid even in stories and elements/etc to keep the kanji distinct from each other.

The difference is that after RTK1 you have memorized all the kanji in the book with a single name. This name is basically the attaching point and location for the kanji and the elements are the pointers to that specific location. Now I don't know for certain, but I would think that after the keyword is strongy attached to the kanji, it is far easier to add new meanings to that specific kanji as they become additional info instead of resulting in double meaning. "This kanjis keyword is X but it also means a,b,c,d and is pronounced 1,2,3,4 and is used in words q,w,e,r,t,y)

Its more than recommendation, and warning. But memory works differently for each person, some might even remember kanji better if they use them while learning new kanji trough RTK1. But don't blame RTK method if you find yourself getting confused with kanji because of double naming.

Heisig RTK1 is not meant to teach you how the kanji are spelled, its meant to make you memorize all the kanji.

Divide and conquer of RTK

1. RTK1: First learn all the kanji and give them a name
2. RTK2: Learn how they are pronounced
----
3. RTK3: Learn the less common Kanji used in some books, names etc.

Many ignore RTK2 and move straight in to words, context or books like Genki they already know the Kanji so now they just focus on learning other meanings, words, grammar etc.

KanjiDevourer Wrote:Of course I tried drawing the kanji, but my drawings always come out so disproportionate that I thought it better to take some calligraphy course if I'd ever want to write kanji with skill.

That's the exact reason I write the kanji. At first they look really bad and disproportionate. But the more I write them, the better it goes.

Also, as I advanced through RTK1, I noticed it took me less and less time to actually be able to write them properly, as most of the primitives were learnt already.

Koos83 Wrote:

KanjiDevourer Wrote:Of course I tried drawing the kanji, but my drawings always come out so disproportionate that I thought it better to take some calligraphy course if I'd ever want to write kanji with skill.

That's the exact reason I write the kanji. At first they look really bad and disproportionate. But the more I write them, the better it goes.

Also, as I advanced through RTK1, I noticed it took me less and less time to actually be able to write them properly, as most of the primitives were learnt already.

I see the advantage you experience. Can you give an estimate of how much more time it costs you to do writing along with srs-ing? Another thing I experienced was that writing the kanji during the reps, especially when starting, took so much more time that it reduced the fun of srs-ing for me, since I wouldn't get to do as many reps in the spare time I have.

I happen to have a cheap wacom bamboo tablet from a few years back - I keep a drawing program open and write the kanji in that while reviewing on this site. Muscle memory helps - I sometimes look at the keyword and start writing the kanji semi-consciously, and half a minute later my conscious brain catches up and tells me why I wrote that.