Back

"Heisig's Remembering the Kanji sucks" - Other Kanji Learning Methods?

#76
(2017-04-28, 7:07 pm)tanaquil Wrote:
(2017-04-28, 2:39 pm)wareya Wrote: That's not a thing.

I gather you haven't read any college Japanese textbooks lately? Because that is 100% a thing.

Yep, 100% a thing. But that's only half the kanji learning regimen. The other half is flashcards with the kanji on front and all the potential readings on the back in hiragana for kun and katakana for ON. I can't tell you how much time I wasted on that method. Even switching from paper and/or 'random order' flashcard software to proper SRS software can't save that degenerate method.

I will say though that Heisig does have stiff competition these days. Kanjidamage, Skritter, Readthekanji.com, iKnow.com, etc, etc. Those old methods were quite frankly always stupid and ineffective and the precise reason that it was widely believed that foreigners couldn't learn to actually read Japanese only speak it. Heisig is revolutionary for its time and is still an effective mnemonic system, but it's no longer Heisig vs. entrenched stupidity, there's a lot of valid alternatives these days.
Reply
#77
Yes, let me correct myself.

(2017-04-28, 12:09 pm)pied2porc Wrote: The method is to help people who has trouble with the standard method

That's not a thing.
Reply
#78
(2017-04-28, 11:13 pm)wareya Wrote: Yes, let me correct myself.

(2017-04-28, 12:09 pm)pied2porc Wrote: The method is to help people who has trouble with the standard method

That's not a thing.
That's a troll.
Reply
May 15 - 26: Pretty Big Deal: Get 31% OFF Premium & Premium PLUS! CLICK HERE
JapanesePod101
#79
(2017-04-28, 11:24 pm)pied2porc Wrote: That's a troll.

The only "standard method" I see RTK's introduction explicitly mention is this one:

>Nonetheless, traditional methods for learning the characters have been the same as those for learning alphabets: drill the shapes one by one, again and again, year after year.

Which is, ironically, exactly what RTK does, it just does so efficiently. RTK assumes that "standard" (traditional) methods are all focused on visual memory, but this is not the case, and it's not what your college textbooks do either.
Edited: 2017-04-28, 11:38 pm
Reply
#80
Thanks for elaborating your reply.
But it still smell like a troll.
Are you trying to debate with yourself?
Quote:The only "standard method" I see RTK's introduction explicitly mention is this one:

You obviously took the time to remove my description of what I call the/a standard method, because apparently it differs from the one RTK's giving.
I haven't read the preface, so I can only trust your words, plus I have the french version of RTK, I don't even know if it has the Heisig's preface or the french author's one.
But frankly speaking I don't care at all about what is said in it. He can say anything, it won't change a thing.
So I don't know what you disagree with.
And people who dismiss a method by its preface are just a joke to me. So yeah, you can quote Heisig as much as you want, sir.
I never said the standard method was about visual memory. And I don't think it is.
To me, standard method is about repetition, muscle memory and learning in context, and a lot of information.
Which sounds good in theory, but in practice it was just too much to digest at the same time (at least for me).
RTK thaught me it was ok to ditch away the reading (for now), it was ok to not focus on the writing, it was ok to not know all the meanings (for now), it was even ok to learn out of context. Do you think this is exactly the same as the standard method?
Do you imply I never really experienced the standard method?
This is just what chris said, silly flashcard. There was so much information on those cards that reviewing them was painfully slow and not to say ineffective (even though in reality it wasn't that much)
RTK don't bother with that. It goes to the essential. The understanding and the remembering process.
You don't have to follow the method blindly, you can add/modify anything you want if you feel at ease with that.
So by the end of the book, you could start reading anything you want (dictionnary, manga, newspaper, novel) and grasp the broad meaning, given you have enough grammar knowledge.
I'm not saying it is a walk in the park, nor that you cannot do without RTK.
I'm sure there are people who instinctively does the same thing as RTK but without the book.
But I wasn't one of them.
Also RTK has more freedom to it than what you think. Just don't follow blindly whatever can be said in the preface  Rolleyes
Also as chris mentionned RTK alone is only 50% of the job, anki or anything alike does the rest.
But it's comparable with the standard method + flashacard, it is also 50/50, but it didn't work for me.
That's all. This is more of a personal experience.

But if you want to debate about which method is the best, then go debate with yourself, i'm not interested!
No, I will give you a hint, it is certainly not RTK!   Big Grin
Edited: 2017-04-29, 12:42 am
Reply
#81
(2017-04-28, 11:38 pm)wareya Wrote:
(2017-04-28, 11:24 pm)pied2porc Wrote: That's a troll.

The only "standard method" I see RTK's introduction explicitly mention is this one:

>Nonetheless, traditional methods for learning the characters have been the same as those for learning alphabets: drill the shapes one by one, again and again, year after year.

Which is, ironically, exactly what RTK does, it just does so efficiently. RTK assumes that "standard" (traditional) methods are all focused on visual memory, but this is not the case, and it's not what your college textbooks do either.

 Sign up to any class, claim to be a  beginner, and they will hand you a practice sheet where they expect you to copy the character many many times. They don't focus on any type of memory, and they don't tell you about imaginative memory. If you're lucky you'll learn a few mnemonics, but don't expect that for many of them. They simply believe in the magic of rote repetition. RTK is nothing like this.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Quote:pied2porc

If you're not overwhelmed by all the meanings and readings and can learn them in one go, don't need the stories, just want to write them a lot, then just stick to the standard method, duh!

Learning all the readings and meanings of a few dozen characters is trivial, so stories are unnecessary. The real challenge, however, is learning all the meanings and readings of thousands of characters, and that's where every little trick helps. Imaginative memory does work. It will likely be mentioned in every book on memory. It is used in memory completions to remember every card in multiple decks in the same order.

Imaginative memory is Heisig's theisis. The cards are ordered to allow this. The program is set to not only teach you the listed kanji, but to teach you how to remember kanji.  Yes, you might already know this even without RTK, but think of RTK as an exercise regiment, or a book of problems that allow you to practice what you think you know.
Edited: 2017-04-29, 2:47 am
Reply
#82
Yup, structured vs unstructured information is the main benefit of RTK, which has nothing to do with visual memory.
But ppl who just skim through the book mostly complain about the lack of this and that, and that combining RTK1/2/3 would have been better. Which I disagree.
First, too much informations in one go slows down the reviews unecessarily.
Second, when you've finished with RTK1, that's when the fun begins.
By having access to different reading material, you start to fill in those gaps in a very natural way without overwhelming yourself.


I think the Heisig approach is more like those people who can manipulate big numbers and operate on them without computer, but in reverse. Instead of linking concrete numbers to abstract shape or colors, it links abstract shape to concrete stories and words, which helps triggering meanings....or maybe I'm wrong  Big Grin anyway who cares
Reply
#83
I want to have this conversation, but I'm not going to respond to a wall of text that popped up when I posted three sentences. I'm sorry, I just don't want to put that kind of effort into this, it doesn't matter that much to me.
Reply
#84
(2017-04-29, 12:34 pm)wareya Wrote: I want to have this conversation, but I'm not going to respond to a wall of text that popped up when I posted three sentences. I'm sorry, I just don't want to put that kind of effort into this, it doesn't matter that much to me.

You only wrote three sentences but they were kinda inappropriate and not to mention how you deliberatly removed part of quotation which in the end didn't serve any purpose.
When you're talking about a wall of text, I suppose you include the other posters, for my part most of what I wrote wasn't directed toward you and really not harmfull at all.
I just stated my point clearly about what I thought was inapproriate about your reply.
So if you want to have a conversation start by being more specific. What you want to talk about? Because now I have no idea.
Reply
#85
It did serve a purpose. It made clear that I wasn't talking about the methods that you described after saying "standard method".
Edited: 2017-04-29, 1:18 pm
Reply
#86
Then why did you quoted me and put my words out of context?
You could have clearly started with your own words. And not to mention your single-sentence-trolling-style of reply.
If you don't agree with someone, the least you can do is elaborate.
Which you didn't do, and I can even say you didn't do it twice.
The only purpose of doing that is for a trolling effect. So what's your problem?
Reply
#87
I quoted your words in context in the first place because that's how you avoid being rude. But then you misinterpreted what I said, so I cut out the parts I wasn't actually responding to. What's inappropriate about that?
Reply
#88
Everything

You quoted me, said that I'm wrong without being any more specific, but in the end you just quoted Heisig, stating that what he said was wrong.....
It has nothing to do with me sir.
Edited: 2017-04-29, 1:38 pm
Reply
#89
I didn't say that you were wrong, though.
Reply
#90
Rolleyes you were, you were showing disagreement. Anyway have a nice day  Wink
Reply
#91
I am not here to fight, I am here to help you. It is not your problem, you need not fight this war. Find your own place in the world and be comfortable with who you are. Give it character maybe? Add some color? Paint a picture?
Edited: 2017-04-30, 11:42 am
Reply