What was your general path? How long did it take you? Why are you learning the language? If you are not fluent, how far along are you? How much time do you devote to studying?

Just some general questions I am wondering.

Do I count if I'm fluent but I've never done RTK?

I guess you do count. Even if you didn't use this method, you know the kanji I'm assuming and are still fluent all the same.

I think he's trying to use this information to deduce whether RTK is necessary and/or worth it, so you probably don't count (no hard feelings )

I think most people would consider me fluent, not near native by any stretch of the imagination but generally fluent, and I did RTK.

How long it took depends how you define fluency.

all RTK does is give you some basic familiarity with the kanji's meaning and writing.

Fluency will probably require familiarity with 5000 -10000 words at a minimum (it could well be double that). You also require a certain critical mass of common patterns to be well and truly ingrained. At the end of the day, RTK won't make you fluent. It may help somewhat by getting you literate faster, but it's really only like 5% of the journey at most.

nadiatims Wrote:but it's really only like 5% of the journey at most.

I can vouch for the accuracy of this. From my experience it's 3-4% or so... I'd put the required vocabulary count at about 20k for anyone to take one's claim to fluency seriously though.

Anyway the best path is to learn the basics quickly then ditch the textbooks and other teaching aids and switch to native media/natural interaction with natives as soon as possible. There's really not much to it... just make it a part of your everyday life and can be fluent or close to it in 3-4 years probably.

What dizmox said is the truth.

The thing about fluency is that it's a moving target. My self from 5 years ago would consider my current self fluent, but there's a ton of things that still bother me a lot about my Japanese skills.

Making it a part of your every day life is the most important thing. Being serious about learning a foreign language is a significant lifestyle choice. It's an incredibly rewarding one, though.

Completing RTK is the beginning of the beginning. RTK isn't so much about making anyone fluent faster. It's about tackling kanji in a way that removes a barrier to entry for people learning Japanese. RTK taught me that learning kanji wasn't such a big deal, and that in fact kanji can make learning Japanese easier.

RTK isn't really a part of a "learn Japanese quick" scheme. It's about building a solid foundation for future learning.

dizmox Wrote:Anyway the best path is to learn the basics quickly then ditch the textbooks and other teaching aids and switch to native media/natural interaction with natives as soon as possible.

Not sure how much I agree with this. A lot of people I know who spent a longer time on teaching aids and textbooks in the beginning benefitted in the long run, because ultimately they make less basic grammar and pronunciation mistakes. Of my friends who have lived in Japan about 5 years (for some reason I have a lot of friends around that benchmark--maybe because I'm just behind it myself), the people who spent time in a class or working with textbooks a lot are doing better in that area, hands down.

Also, why be exclusive? It's not like you can't use textbooks and teaching aids while also using native material and interacting with Japanese people.

Fillanzea Wrote:Do I count if I'm fluent but I've never done RTK?

You'd have to define "fluent". Learn any language forum has pages of debate on that. My definition would be "to be able to do in another language what you can do in you first language".

I got offered an MA exchange to Japan based on my language skills based solely on my study from books. Obviously I went berserk, but I got offered it still the same. I think oral/aural fluency and reading/writing fluency are two very different things in Japanese.

does fluency after to be oral/aural?

I'm not fluent yet - I guess I would say I'm intermediate. I didn't do RTK when I first studied Japanese, but I decided to do it when I decided to start working on Japanese again after taking about 3 or 4 years off. I think it was worth doing, if that's part of what this thread is getting at.

Tzadeck Wrote:Also, why be exclusive? It's not like you can't use textbooks and teaching aids while also using native material and interacting with Japanese people.

I completely agree. I think there are things you can learn through native materials and exposure, but other things where it helps to have explanation and focused study.

It took me about 3.5 years of study to get to J1 level on the business Japanese test (550 points). Apparently that means I can communicate cross a "wide range of business situations".

That might mean fluent to most people but my personal goal is to get up above J1+ level which is able to communicate "in any business situation".

I lived in Japan for 3 years and must have put in at least 2,500 hours into active study.

HonyakuJoshua Wrote:Removed due to post being edited.

Didn't you say before that you threatened to kill a girlfriend as well? These are rather frightening statements you keep making.

@Tzadeck

Sorry I shouldn't have said best without considering other people's learning experiences. I just meant that worked well for me. By learn the basics quickly I meant going through Genki I, Core 6000 and Tae Kim and (optionally) covering N1/N2 grammar in a year or so, after which I don't think textbooks will be able to improve one's foundation much.

If someone's dedicated I'm not sure why they'd end up making basic grammar and pronunciation mistakes after 5 years regardless of method really though... However long it takes, someone who's fluent at reading and listening, has 2channelled/IM'd for years and chatted in real life extensively should be able to pass for Japanese online and be at the point where things like pitch accent are the biggest of their pronunciation concerns, right? This is assuming one's spent a short time reading how to do things like ん and らりるれろ right though.

Quote:Tzadeck: Yeah, I agree. Removed I got to this stage by reading grammar books and studying.

It's like the bolded part was just inserted unrelatedly as a random outburst...

I think it'd probably best that everyone on the forum avoid giving their contact info or anything like that to HonyakuJoshua, haha.

Does scholarship mean something bad in Europe?

Nope, I'm still trying to work that part out.

quincy Wrote:Does scholarship mean something bad in Europe?

I LOLed @ this xD I got pretty confused too as to why he would be upset for receiving a free education.

Nope my road keeps getting longer...

Finished rtk almost finished Core 6k but never got to it because I've been in Japan. I'm at a point where i can get shit done if i get stuck. I can also talk to Japanese people and develope some kind of relationship but not as deep as in english. I still struggle with expressing tones and feelings in the way i speak. I must sound like some cute robot made for kids to speak to. I'm not looking for an end anymore just gonna keep walking.

kitakitsune Wrote:It took me about 3.5 years of study to get to J1 level on the business Japanese test (550 points). Apparently that means I can communicate cross a "wide range of business situations".

i don't think tests are a good yardstick - many people can pass tests without real skills.

I think that some people have the ability, much better than others, to find similarities and patterns in a test. Some people in my chemistry class in high school who made much better grades than me ended up knowing much less chemistry than I did. It all depends on how much you retain for your experiences too. You could be a good test taker because you actually did what was supposed to and beyond to understand the material.

Imabi, yeah it frustrated me throughout education... I actually think it would be possible to pass JLPT 1 without being THAT good at Japanese...

Unlike other subjects, though, language is spontaneous. And so, there's no way to actually 100% make sure you know everything that can show up on the test. So, you actually have to rely on your own skills more so with language than with other subjects. However, in a classroom setting, I think it is very well possible to learn how to take the professor's tests and not get enough substantial out of it. As far as the JLPT, I plan to not take it. I speak Japanese and I don't want it telling me how well I know it. As for other people, though, it is a very important goal and they should try to get there. There's nothing wrong or bad in aiming for the JLPT 1, and the people that get good scores on it in my opinion should be considered as knowing Japanese, whether they are fluent or not by that point is a different story and should be treated as such.

Another question would be, how long before you could understand most manga or anime?

egoplant Wrote:Another question would be, how long before you could understand most manga or anime?

Couple years minimum for most people.

Maybe a year or two. Depends on the kind of show. Kid oriented shows shouldn't be that hard to figure out how to understand.