Ho boy.

Maybe you could try explaining your personal definition of "grammar" since it's obvious that each person has a different interpretation of it somehow?
AはBだ is grammar. 私は学生だ is the application of a grammatical rule, so when viewed from a learning perspective it still relates to grammar. Knowing how to place the sentence in a grammar tree, which is the DO and S and what not is no longer grammar, it's linguistics. However, function words are generally considered more important than content words, as it is easier to understand something when you don't get the content words than when you don't get the content words. And then there's aspects of the language which can count as both grammar and other groups (phrasal verbs). It's used pretty flexibly these days, of course.

And just a bit of input here... In us Romance language speaking countries we DO learn grammar in school... and no, it's not just for show, most of the kids have to learn it since they don't know it otherwise (regional language, more complicated tenses which a kid wouldn't use, correct conjugations for weird verbs, what not). It would be weird to learn how to conjugate 4 types of verbs in 22 different ways (8 moods, 18 tenses, each person gets a different conjugation, and each type of verb conjugates differently) on their own. So each language with its own.

Drawing arbitrary lines in the sand as to what constitutes more important aspect of what equates to a "language" is an unfortunate regress which will only lead you to turtles, turtles all the way down. Without balance and consistency, it doesn't really matter how you study.

Word.

I think the common argument for "that doesn't count" is that usually kids already know those things and simply learn to give them a name.

Whether the kids actually know those things or you're simply overestimating your ability at the time is questionable, however.

Zgarbas wrote:

And just a bit of input here... In us Romance language speaking countries we DO learn grammar in school... and no, it's not just for show, most of the kids have to learn it since they don't know it otherwise (regional language, more complicated tenses which a kid wouldn't use, correct conjugations for weird verbs, what not). It would be weird to learn how to conjugate 4 types of verbs in 22 different ways (8 moods, 18 tenses, each person gets a different conjugation, and each type of verb conjugates differently) on their own. So each language with its own.

Why not just let the language evolve and over time become simpler? If the natives are not picking up on certain aspects of the grammar naturally, how crucial can they really be?

That's not really Chomsky's theory, it's a fundamental linguistic theory.  Most linguistic research depends on the basic assumption that all languages are equally complex and that all natural languages have rules.

The grammar that people study in school is to learn the educated dialect or formal writing rules, and to study grammatical stuff just for general knowledge.

Why not just let the language evolve and over time become simpler? If the natives are not picking up on certain aspects of the grammar naturally, how crucial can they really be?

Primarily it's because of the very widespread misconception that the educated/standard dialect of a language is inherently superior to other dialects (sometimes people even believe that non-standard dialects have no rules or are just the result of stupid people trying to do the educated dialect but failing).

Of course there is the practical concern that in most societies, knowing the educated dialect is very important (in large part because of that misconception).

Last edited by yudantaiteki (2013 February 13, 5:58 am)

nadiatims wrote:

Does everyone at least agree that grammar is just a description, a tool, and does not actually equate to the language you are trying to learn?

I don't think it necessarily applies to everyone but I remember once I decided that verb conjugations didn't exist it helped me immensely.  When you are having a conversation there is just no time to sit there and convert plain form verbs to whatever tense you need.  This is especially true of passives when you need to get your ga's an ni's correct or you're story will be reversed.

Also I much prefer a dozen example sentences of a grammar pattern as opposed to an explanation of it.  That goes for verbs as well.

There's also the fact that natives tend to flat out ignore grammar at times.  Clearly its much better to speak naturally and to be easily understood than it is to make sure you don't anger the author of ADo[...]JG right?

Natives do learn grammar.
They learn it in school.
Even if they don't consciously parse the rules in their mind later on in life, it's still there.

I'm sorry, but I've heard too many native English speakers that skipped the grammar (and reading) lessons in elementary school. Their English sucks. To put it bluntly. If you think their English is fine, you're fooling yourself.

chamcham wrote:

I'm sorry, but I've heard too many native English speakers that skipped the grammar (and reading) lessons in elementary school. Their English sucks. To put it bluntly. If you think their English is fine, you're fooling yourself.

If they're a native English speaker, their English is fine although they may be speaking a non-standard dialect.  Their "Standard English" may be bad, though.

I think it's important to remember, learning to speak doesn't require any grammar study. But grammar study can improve how you speak and write.

Kids make common mistakes all the time:
Can I go to the bathroom? vs May I go to the bathroom?

There is a bit of difference in the meaning, but your still going to understand the intent of what is being said. And even with these common small mistakes, these kids are more fluent then your average foreign language learner.

Zgarbas wrote:

Not everything in any language is intuitive, but I don't see people going around saying they eated an dinner.

There is nothing inherently wrong with eated though. We just say ate because at some point that became the standard.

Zgarbas wrote:

Saying that we should just drop basic grammar because it's hard to master intuitively is a bit silly.

That's the thing though, 'basic' grammar is mastered intuitively by natives. Languages came about because people within certain regions/communities would use common vocabulary and apply the same handful of easily intuited rules. Beyond that we pretty much just go by what feels or sounds right (ie. what we're accustomed to hearing from the people around us). That's why beyond the basics there are a lot of differences and idiosyncrasies in the way people from different areas and generations speak. That's why languages change over time. Kids pick up the most obvious and useful core grammar patterns and apply those while remaining eternally ignorant of the less important ones, or pick them up much later after they already well and truly fluent. Children, just like non-native speakers wing it with an incomplete grammar model and in doing so they influence the development of that language. It is impossible to get a complete and entirely accurate model of grammar for a language, because the natives do not for the most part follow any one consistent model. Language is an act of creation, and as communities of people express new and original thoughts, new grammar patterns emerge.

Of course if you go back to Old English it's virtually incomprehensible; the grammar was a lot different from ME.

Japanese is kind of the same; a lot of the basics are the same but the conjugation was different and there were a lot of patterns that aren't used anymore -- although in some ways I feel like Japanese is almost the opposite of English in that a lot of the vocabulary is still the same but the grammar is very different, despite the similar underlying concepts.

If you look at something like Taketori Monogatari:
今は昔竹取の翁といふものありけり。野山にまじりて、竹をとりつゝ、萬の事につかひけり。名をば讃岐造麿となんいひける。その竹の中に、本光る竹ひとすぢありけり。怪しがりて寄りて見るに、筒の中ひかりたり。それを見れば、三寸ばかりなる人いと美しうて居たり。

Almost all of the vocabulary in that is familiar in modern Japanese (and most of it isn't even rare or archaic in modern), but the grammar is very different with -keri, -tari, -tsutsu (different meaning), nan, -ni as "and", -ba as "when", etc. 

(Unfortunately, since 古文 was used up until the late 19th century, most Japanese people can't read anything from before 1900 or so without it being translated into modern Japanese.  But the spoken language was fairly close to today's Japanese.)

Last edited by yudantaiteki (2013 February 14, 4:16 am)

tokyostyle wrote:

Stansfield123 wrote:

No, definitely not. You should do Tae Kim Basic and the first lesson from Tae Kim essential. Then you should work on your vocab (i.e. 500 sentences from Core2K). Then you should do Tae Kim Essential, and work on your vocab some more. And then, finally, do the rest of Tae Kim.

You really should not be giving advice on what learning materials to use because you are not at all qualified to do so:  You recently asked a question here that is covered in the first 3-4 chapters of every beginner textbook on the market.  This advice of Tae Kim + Core is completely outdated and needs to finally be put to rest.  Please don't take this personally at all, it's not like you are the first or only person to recommend this insanity, but definitely spend some time researching the many better methods and paths that are available.

There's a reason that both AJATT and JALUP recommend that you purchase textbooks aimed at beginners.  The free materials that are available are not at all sufficient and buying beginner textbooks is a very small investment in your education. Also if your future plan is to steal everything anyway then why not at least start by stealing some good learning materials?  Theft isn't just for games and movies.

Yes it's possible to spin your wheels and fumble through free resources like Tae Kim and Core X+1k but it's insanely boring when compared to cheap textbooks like Japanese the Manga Way.  Furthermore you really want to start cherry-picking native materials as soon as possible and the order of the words you learn from a beginner textbook is a lot more conducive to being able to do that sooner.

There are so many great tools around that make the transition to native materials much more pleasant than it used it be.  People need to be directed to those rather than this medieval torture of Tae Kim and Core.  (RTK is torturous enough that there is no reason at all to invent more necessary evils.)

so you say that approach of core deck and tae kim sucks some major $$$. what would you say is superior to using the iKnow decks?

errtu wrote:

so you say that approach of core deck and tae kim sucks some major $$$. what would you say is superior to using the iKnow decks?

It doesn't suck ass, but it is completely dry and boring.  You get that with beginner text books as well, but you also get a larger volume of material.  They contain dialogs, reading selections, cultural notes, and other random things.  They also give you a complete structure that combines the grammar and vocabulary in a very organized and step-by-step way.

Tae Kim is very well organized and seems to completely cover the basics but lacks some of the depth you'll get from a textbook and so people pair it with the Core decks to make up for that.  There's really very little to say about the Core decks except they are free and correct.

However, the good or bad, suck or swallow, superior or inferior of your boring source of grammar and vocabulary is not generally the issue.  Although the title of this thread is called Grammar,  the OP is very clearly "I've done RTK so what next?"  The standard answer here is Tae Kim+Core but that is a very incomplete and obsolete answer.  Although I personally believe the answer to this question has been well covered by AJATT and JALUP I'm going to regurgitate their advice in step-by-step form.

1) Find Japanese crap you enjoy.  I did dramas so we'll start with that.
2) Watch タイヨウのうた Episode 1 with Japanese subs (cause you know all them kanjis!)
3) Read Genki Ch. 1 (Grammar points, vocab, dialog, passages)
4) Add sentences or clozes or MCDs to your SRS (from Genki Ch. 1)
5) Rip the drama audio and listen to it passively as much as possible.  The goal here is to listen for the aisatsu you just learned from Genki Ch. 1
6) Rip apart those subtitles so you can slowly add some of them to your SRS (use tools like sub2srs)
7) You learned XはYです and using a handy Cmd-F you'll find this in the subs: 「それは本当。」Add card in your preferred format and get definitions from alc.co.jp. (*1)
8) Occasionally do one of those silly exercises in your textbook and add cards to cover grammar points or vocab you are week on
9) Roll 1d8 and do that step again but maybe with new material. (*2)

(*1) In reality you might want to get in a few chapters before seeking out specific examples from your native materials, but the point is that even the most basic grammar example is out there in really real Japanese.

(*2) Step 9 is important and not a joke.  Grab some real physical dice and make you a little chart and roll those suckers.  Don't do the exact same thing in the exact same order every day.  Japanese is not your job; it's your hobby, entertainment, and fun.  Also add some whacky stuff that you do occasionally both as a way to rest and break the monotony of your main tasks.

None of those steps should be a surprise to anyone because they are exactly what AJATT and JALUP say.  If you absolutely must forgo a textbook then Tae Kim will cover all of the grammar you need, but there are so many better ways to improve your passive vocabulary than SRSing raw vocab flash cards. 

In fact in general if you have to make the choice between actively learning something Japanese and doing your sentence or vocabulary reps then always chose the active learning.  Never get behind on your kanji reviews, those are too important, but don't constantly replace active study with semi-passive reviewing.  The active study is the only part that propels you forward.

Last edited by tokyostyle (2013 February 15, 1:37 pm)

tokyostyle wrote:

In fact in general if you have to make the choice between actively learning something Japanese and doing your sentence or vocabulary reps then always chose the active learning.  Never get behind on your kanji reviews, those are too important, but don't constantly replace active study with semi-passive reviewing.  The active study is the only part that propels you forward.

It's great that there are options out there.

But what needs to be realized is that people find value in different things. Some people may enjoy watching a show while making it a part of their study time, or read a novel or a multitude of things. They enjoy creating their own path towards fluency in a language. They don't mind starting at an early stage where learning is more than immersing oneself in the language- when textbooks, SRS, dictionaries and discussion forums are an integral part of consuming the material, because said people simply can't understand the language without external aid.

That said some people are the opposite. They enjoy understanding. They enjoy effortless production and immersion. They enjoy the constant feedback that eyes can see- that they are learning something new. They find value in getting 90% of words right in Anki and then going out there to the wild and witness all that they have come to understand. They don't particularly enjoy the opposite- not understanding, not being able to produce the language. It is frustrating especially when practically everything they come across is that kind of material in the beginning.

Semi-passive reviewing propels you forward like the rest of methods. It is effortless, the material is right there to be consumed so there is no need to lift a finger. You always feel like you understand! Maybe it's just a word or a grammar point, but it feels good and real nonetheless. You just let the language come to you, and when the time comes, the native material is there to be enjoyed like it should: with as little effort as possible related to 'getting" the language in it. When I watch a show or read a comic book, I like to enjoy it without making it a (concious) part of my studies. There is nothing inferior about that.

I know there is a period of growing pains no matter what you do. No pain no gain. Eliminate most of it beforehand, though, and it's no big deal.