The story contains the primitives, and so it is essentially the formula for writing the kanji.

lucidthoughts wrote:

When Hesig created the Flash cards, wasn't the story on the front of the card with the keyword?

Yes, but it was upside-down, the idea being that you first read the keyword then try to remember/write the kanji before checking your story.

Apologies for having read only most of that post, but I'll explain how I find stories to be best used. When I learn a card, I make a story composing of and allowing for the recollection of the primitives. On my anki deck, the story is also hidden by default.

While reviewing, I recall the story and rebuild the kanji. If and when I fail to rebuild the kanji, I unhide the story. If I fail to recall the story but write the kanji correctly, I move on regardless (this inevitably happens, and more often towards the end). If I recall the story but rebuild the kanji wrong, I sometimes make another story.

The idea is, as in building, the story is there at first as a scaffolding of sorts for the bridge between the keyword and the kanji. once you have a strong and stable "structure" between the two mentally, the base is no longer needed, and you can just recall the kanji (I believe this analogy actually resembles some of the neurological functions in play during this learning process). Bear in mind, this is not a stage to be rushed, but achieved naturally.

Also worth noting, I'm quite sure heisig does go over this in the book.

Edit: For what it's worth, I also fail the card should I need to unhide the story.

Last edited by frony0 (2012 July 14, 2:03 pm)

frony0 wrote:

Apologies for having read only most of that post

That's ok. I did ramble, I'm just frustrated.

On my anki deck

Any reason you use Anki over the site?

While reviewing, I recall the story and rebuild the kanji. If and when I fail to rebuild the kanji, I unhide the story. If I fail to recall the story but write the kanji correctly, I move on regardless (this inevitably happens, and more often towards the end). If I recall the story but rebuild the kanji wrong, I sometimes make another story.

Ok we're getting somewhere. So if I fail to remember, show the story. When you say you fail to recall the story but write the kanji, when you say you move on, what do you mean? I get you mean you pass yourself, but you do / do not look at the story as well?

The idea is, as in building, the story is there at first as a scaffolding of sorts for the bridge between the keyword and the kanji. once you have a strong and stable "structure" between the two mentally, the base is no longer needed, and you can just recall the kanji (I believe this analogy actually resembles some of the neurological functions in play during this learning process). Bear in mind, this is not a stage to be rushed, but achieved naturally.

I get it. This is what gets me though. We keep throwing around the idea that you **know the word**. Who says that isn't attributed to memorization? I know the first 15 kanji pretty much without the story, not that hard. From what I understood, the stories were to make long term connections... let's say I get my 15 kanji right without the story for next month... based on what I am understanding is your process, I wouldn't be looking at the story at all, aside from when I actually fill in the initial story... unless we're saying that just setting up the initial story builds a long term connection, I fail to see how stories are really being utilized if I can just brute force memorize kanji (I can't help that my brain just knows the first 15 kanji without the story, or whatever kanji it is I learn in the short term) ... I don't want to run into a situation where I realize that I didn't build a strong enough connection and just inevitably be failing Kanji down the road because I created a story then ignored it because I got the Kanji right at the time anyway. I don't get the disparity between this supposed "long term connection" I'm building with these stories, and the fact that I could just as easily get them right and not have to refer to the story at all.

Also worth noting, I'm quite sure heisig does go over this in the book.

He hasn't covered it yet (I don't think), so I don't know. I think it would be ill-conceived if I just start taking down stories and brute forcing these kanji whether I remember the story or not.

lucidthoughts wrote:

Any reason you use Anki over the site?

None specific. Primarily because I used Anki before I came across this site, and even started learning Japanese. I prefer it now due to better mobile support and in my opinion a better / more flexible scheduling algorithm.

Ok we're getting somewhere. So if I fail to remember, show the story. When you say you fail to recall the story but write the kanji, when you say you move on, what do you mean? I get you mean you pass yourself, but you do / do not look at the story as well?

By the time you get to that stage (which should take a while), the story should be immaterial anyway, so looking at it again is usually pointless. If you do feel you only recalled the kanji by luck or circumstance, it may be an idea to anyway. (Consider the kanji for "one". I'm confident you don't need a story to remember that)

I get it. This is what gets me though. We keep throwing around the idea that you **know the word**. Who says that isn't attributed to memorization? I know the first 15 kanji pretty much without the story, not that hard. From what I understood, the stories were to make long term connections... let's say I get my 15 kanji right without the story for next month... based on what I am understanding is your process, I wouldn't be looking at the story at all, aside from when I actually fill in the initial story... unless we're saying that just setting up the initial story builds a long term connection, I fail to see how stories are really being utilized if I can just brute force memorize kanji (I can't help that my brain just knows the first 15 kanji without the story, or whatever kanji it is I learn in the short term) ... I don't want to run into a situation where I realize that I didn't build a strong enough connection and just inevitably be failing Kanji down the road because I created a story then ignored it because I got the Kanji right at the time anyway. I don't get the disparity between this supposed "long term connection" I'm building with these stories, and the fact that I could just as easily get them right and not have to refer to the story at all.

The first 15 kanji are memorable for several reasons; they are the first kanji you come across, they are very graphically simple and derivable, and they are used repetitively in the rest of the book as primitives. I wouldn't worry about those.

The reason for which brute forcing is discouraged is the same reason this book exists. You will find that if you do brute force, you will forget the kanji later on. If you use the story method, not only will the memory be considerably stronger (for reasons I don't understand myself) but you will also have a crutch to fall on in the case that you forget the image itself.

So yes, as you said yourself, they are there only for initial use (and if you forget the kanji again) until you reach that stage where you can "freestyle".

He hasn't covered it yet

My bad. I only skim through the long texts.

I agree with most of what all of you are saying, although, even though it's fine to hide the story, I think it's better to crutch on it completely at first, "Lazy Kanji"-style.

A story might be: The ________ man's TOP HAT was forevermore hung on the HOOK.

It doesn't give away the keyword or kanji, just the elements/primitives. Then you can write the kanji. Obviously, eventually, the same thing happens that a lot of you are describing. You give a quick glance at the story, or you don't even really take the primitives into account and you're just like, "Oh, this is -deceased- and it should be written like so: 亡"

And you can eventually just remove the story from the front of the card and just put the keyword, if you wish. But trying to guess the keyword and kanji both is not only more fun, imo, but you also are really thinking about those 2 parts and your clues are the primitives. So it's forcing you to think in terms of primitives that way when you encounter a kanji, you see the primitives and remember the story and know what it is (unless it's really easy or the story's already become superfluous for you).

The advantage over the method you all are describing is that it really points out the primitives and that you're not just left seeing "paulownia tree" and not having any idea how to get to writing the kanji without looking at the story (at least in the early stages -- obviously you ideally would want to be able to go keyword to kanji and visa-versa with no trouble).

Last edited by Kirby115 (2012 July 20, 10:41 am)