Musashi wrote:

nadiatims wrote:

I can't be bothered reading this whole thread, but I don't see the point in discouraging someone.
I think it's definately possible to learn a language to a reasonable level in 3 months. I think a 'smart' learner should in theory be able to work out exactly what it is they need to know and figure out the most efficient way to internalise it through drills etc. I know for a fact that if I were to start studying another language now, I could get to the point my japanese is at now in probably less than a year, simply by bypassing all the unimportant crap and studying efficiently. No doubt if I learn more languages I'll acumulate more tricks and have an even better idea of what material can(or should) be learned and in what way and in which order. I don't really buy into the learn through osmosis idea. The idea that everything (vocab/grammar/etc) should just be learned by absorbing it from your environment. That process is extremely slow until you're already at a reasonably high level. I think there are tricks for learning different things, grammar, different types of words (verbs, names, adjectives etc), writing and so on that can be used to progress rapidly through the initial stage of complete suckage. The problem is that most people (myself included) don't know what these methods are until after they've already tried a whole bunch of crappy techniques.

Not to bust your bubble, but that's just crap. (sorry for saying it so rude) What is a 'reasonable level' to you? Wake up and smell the coffee and be realistic, if 'smart' people would have found that special way of learning then they would've made BIG bucks out of that method and tons of people would be 'hey I just learned a new language in 3 months using mr. X's method'. You said that you know for a fact that you can learn a new language in less than a year to the point where your Japanese is, now I don't know what your Japanese level is, but that's in about less than a YEAR, not 3 months. How long did it took for you to learn your own mother tongue? I BET that ain't 3 months now is it. Don't try to chase unrealistic goals and look at it with common sense. Unless you have an IQ of 300²...
(ok that was quite a discouraging post, だから力いっぱい入れて頑張りましょう！)

I'm a Uni student with a relaxed schedule and in 4 months (end of next month) I will have completed RtK, Tae Kim and KO2001. A month of that was taken up with studying for my exams. Somebody who approached learning the language as a full time job and did 10-12 hours of study a day could have achieved much, much more than this in the same amount of time. I'm not saying thats enough to pass JLPT1 (far from it), but I think you guys are underestimating how much can be done in a short period of time. You don't need special methods or techniques (other than what we already have available to us on this forum); you just need lots of hard work.

nadiatims wrote:

Musashi wrote:

Wake up and smell the coffee and be realistic, if 'smart' people would have found that special way of learning then they would've made BIG bucks out of that method and tons of people would be 'hey I just learned a new language in 3 months using mr. X's method'.

But there are plenty of people making such claims, and there are people learning languages to a communicative level realitively quickly. Check out some of the polyglots on youtube. The reason 'most' people can't is because they don't want to apply any critical thought to how they go about learning. They just want to find one pre-approved method and follow it to the bitter end, be that a class, a certain textbook, srs or whatever. You need to be flexible and able to adapt your methods to whatever it is you're trying to learn. That is what I mean by being a smart learner.

Oh believe me, I want it more that anything and I'm working my a** off to get there. If you have any method that can allow me to learn a language in 3 months, please do tell. I'm open to any method that can help me considerably. I do agree with BlackMacros, I don't think you need any 'special' method/technique. Anything'll work as long as you work very hard and put your heart in it. Yes, in 3 months you CAN achieve a lot by super hard work, but fluency (aka 'learned a language') ? I don't think so.

nadiatims wrote:

Musashi wrote:

How long did it took for you to learn your own mother tongue? I BET that ain't 3 months now is it.

Obviously not, precisely because as an infant my critical thinking abilities were much less than they are now.

Ok that was a bit exaggerated but still, think, throughout highschool you still had classes in 'insert-own-native-language' (and I'm not talking about things like literature n stuff).

And people making such 'claims', I claim that I'm Superman, now do you believe me? I mean, with all respect, you and I both know that people ain't learning a language in just 3 months, it's called reality. And people can say things like: 'yea but you can learn it to a conversational level' or 'you can at least pass JLPT 2級 with this method' or 'insert any level you consider I-learned-a-language', those people lie to you. But I'm not you, ofcourse you are entitled to have your own opinions and views although I can't really say they're realistic. People have been learning languages for god knows how long. If there was a golden way to learn a language in 3 months, you wouldn't see uni's having language programs lasting a couple years, in-the-evening-conversational-classes helping you on your trip to fluency, websites like RTK etc. Learning a language is a tough cookie to crack and true, while some people may learn languages faster than others, a prospect of 3 months to do the job... erhm right.

Just work very hard and you'll do just fine.

Last edited by Musashi (2009 June 29, 10:09 am)

Here's a super method to 『INSTANT FLUENCY IN TARGET LANGUAGE』!

What you'll need:
a longdrink glass
1 quarter bleach
1 quarter pure alcohol
1 quarter Ocean Fresh laundry detergent
1 quarter ammonia
pinch of salt
1 lemon
some ice cubes

Preparation:
Fill the glass with liquid parts, stir well, add a couple of icecubes
Wet edges of the glass, rub salt on the edges. Top with a slice of lemon and bottoms up.

Time to fluency:
5 min.

Last edited by Musashi (2009 June 29, 10:36 am)

Hey musashi, I think it would be better if we cheered MR/MS ahibba on. It's true you can reach a decent level in three months of intensive, immersive study, especially if the focus is on conversation rather than reading, and you have already acquired many other languages.

The point of this thread, though, is not whether you can reach a good level, but pass JLPT1. That means internalizing thousands of facts in a very short period. A person attempting such a feat needs all the encouragement he or she can get. Though, now that I think about it, negative encouragement my actually help a bit.

My dog learned to speak Klingon in a week.

nadiatims wrote:

If I could go back in time, I could teach myself basic japanese syntax in a day rather than having to intuit it through exposure and other peoples' crappy explanations.

That's right. Basic Japanese syntax can be learned in a day or less. Anyone tried "Power Japanese" software of the 90's, understand what I mean.

nadiatims wrote:

Obviously not, precisely because as an infant my critical thinking abilities were much less than they are now.

Yes, many studies, in fact, find that adult learners progress faster than children (Language Acquisition, pp. 94-106). Even in phonetics, there are studies finding that adults are better at recognizing and producing foreign sounds.

Musashi wrote:

Yes, in 3 months you CAN achieve a lot by super hard work, but fluency (aka 'learned a language') ? I don't think so.

Is the multi-choice test called JLPT 1 = fluency?

Musashi wrote:

you wouldn't see uni's having language programs lasting a couple years

Because universites usually use the old traditional time-consuming methods, does not mean that there are no other effective methods. For example, which university use RTK to teach students the kanji?

kyotokanji wrote:

I can imagine that this can be used very efectively for langauges that use a writing system that is easily learnt.

In the long run, reading in logographic writing is easier and faster than reading in alphabetic languages. Chinese read chinese subtitles faster than Americans reading English subtitles.

kyotokanji wrote:

You would need to know the readings of the kanji already before you started.

Of course. Learn the readings first, then you can use this method.

However, you can use romaji. It's not a bad idea. Many non-European languages changed their scripts to latin. After WWII, there were attempts to change the Japanese as well. If they succeeded, we would all learn it using romaji with no problems.

Musashi wrote:

If he does, he'd earn my greatest respect and I'd like to know how he did it.

Just wait until September comes

ahibba wrote:

nadiatims wrote:

If I could go back in time, I could teach myself basic japanese syntax in a day rather than having to intuit it through exposure and other peoples' crappy explanations.

That's right. Basic Japanese syntax can be learned in a day or less. Anyone tried "Power Japanese" software of the 90's, understand what I mean.

nadiatims wrote:

Obviously not, precisely because as an infant my critical thinking abilities were much less than they are now.

Yes, many studies, in fact, find that adult learners progress faster than children (Language Acquisition, pp. 94-106). Even in phonetics, there are studies finding that adults are better at recognizing and producing foreign sounds.

Musashi wrote:

Yes, in 3 months you CAN achieve a lot by super hard work, but fluency (aka 'learned a language') ? I don't think so.

Is the multi-choice test called JLPT 1 = fluency?

Musashi wrote:

you wouldn't see uni's having language programs lasting a couple years

Because universites usually use the old traditional time-consuming methods, does not mean that there are no other effective methods. For example, which university use RTK to teach students the kanji?

kyotokanji wrote:

I can imagine that this can be used very efectively for langauges that use a writing system that is easily learnt.

In the long run, reading in logographic writing is easier and faster than reading in alphabetic languages. Chinese read chinese subtitles faster than Americans reading English subtitles.

kyotokanji wrote:

You would need to know the readings of the kanji already before you started.

Of course. Learn the readings first, then you can use this method.

However, you can use romaji. It's not a bad idea. Many non-European languages changed their scripts to latin. After WWII, there were attempts to change the Japanese as well. If they succeeded, we would all learn it using romaji with no problems.

Musashi wrote:

If he does, he'd earn my greatest respect and I'd like to know how he did it.

Just wait until September comes

What have you been doing all this time...?
Oh forget about it, dinner's ready, need to go eat, later!

ahibba wrote:

That's right. Basic Japanese syntax can be learned in a day or less. Anyone tried "Power Japanese" software of the 90's, understand what I mean.
...
Just wait until September comes

So, you're not exactly going to start from zero in September then?  How much Japanese have you learned or are planning to learn before you 'officially' start learning it?

Is the multi-choice test called JLPT 1 = fluency?

No, but it does equal a high degree of comprehension ability in listening and reading.

You could certainly use memory techniques to pass the kanji sections and a fair amount of vocab & grammar sections too.  I just don't think you would be anywhere near able to understand the listening parts in 3 months - not even for JLPT 2 never mind 1.

Last edited by vosmiura (2009 June 29, 3:08 pm)

kyotokanji wrote:

To ahibba, the problem about learning to read Japanese is learning the readings in the first place. Once you've learnt all the readings correctly, a lot of the work is already done. This is why the l-r method can't work for Japanese until a very high level has already been reached.

Do you want a good method to learn the readings quickly?

First, tell me the size of your Japanese vocabulary currently.

kyotokanji wrote:

I have a copy of "Breaking into Japanese Litereature" and it's impossible to follow along with the narrator .

If you want to use L-R to increase listening comprehnsion, why don't you use romaji texts? you must not disparage romaji, you can read with it faster and it will not affect the kanji learning process.

vosmiura wrote:

So, you're not exactly going to start from zero in September then?

Of course not. I know that watashi = I, ringo = apple, tabete = ate, etc. (In the first post I was not refering to myself.)

However, there is no big difference between my current level and starting from scratch.

vosmiura wrote:

I just don't think you would be anywhere near able to understand the listening parts in 3 months - not even for JLPT 2 never mind 1.

I'll try an see.

ahibba wrote:

kyotokanji wrote:

To ahibba, the problem about learning to read Japanese is learning the readings in the first place. Once you've learnt all the readings correctly, a lot of the work is already done. This is why the l-r method can't work for Japanese until a very high level has already been reached.

Do you want a good method to learn the readings quickly?

First, tell me the size of your Japanese vocabulary currently.

kyotokanji wrote:

I have a copy of "Breaking into Japanese Litereature" and it's impossible to follow along with the narrator .

If you want to use L-R to increase listening comprehnsion, why don't you use romaji texts? you must not disparage romaji, you can read with it faster and it will not affect the kanji learning process.

I see where you're going with this. You completely remove kanji from the equation, then attach them later, right? Interesting.

And what is this L-R people keep speaking of?

Edit: NM. Seems like it's shadowing.

K wrote:

To ahibba, the problem about learning to read Japanese is learning the readings in the first place. Once you've learnt all the readings correctly, a lot of the work is already done. This is why the l-r method can't work for Japanese until a very high level has already been reached. L-R is perfect for German etc but not for Japanese. I have a copy of "Breaking into Japanese Litereature" and it's impossible to follow along with the narrator . I am however going to give the L-R method a go with German at some time in the future.

I could understand the first story in the book as I shadowed it. That was at the 3-4 month mark, though. Interested in seeing how things turn out.

Last edited by kazelee (2009 June 29, 5:19 pm)

ahibba wrote:

kazelee wrote:

I see where you're going with this. You completely remove kanji from the equation, then attach them later, right? Interesting.

Do you know why Aijin and other Japanese native speakers find it strange that we learn writing the kanji first seperately and the readings later?

Do you know why the Japanese find it easier to learn the readings along with writing?

Because they learned the spoken language first.

They have enough vocabualy so they can attach the readings to kanji easily.

We face difficulty to memorize the the reading or to associate it with the kanji ......

I knew this. Just wanted confirmation that this is what you were implying.

ahibba wrote:

kazelee wrote:

And what is this L-R people keep speaking of?

Edit: NM. Seems like it's shadowing.

No. It's a very different thing.

Care to divulge some details?

Edit: Finally found this

http://www.grow-you.com/fast-way-to-lea … ng-method/

面白い

Last edited by kazelee (2009 June 29, 6:08 pm)

For the translating step of L-Ring, I don't think you're supposed to translate the whole book.

Musashi wrote:

Thought you said you haven't started learning yet? Dug a hole for yerself now didn't you? やっぱりトロール

Dear, "we" in that sentence refers to the non-native learners, not to me!

I have not even started learning the first simple kanji. See this:

http://kanji.koohii.com/showprofile.php?user=ahibba

Do you know that I haven't used Anki for learning yet?!

The only times I opened this software were to explore its features and compare it with other SRS, or when I used it to make the decks for KO2001 that I posted them here.

yukamina wrote:

For the translating step of L-Ring, I don't think you're supposed to translate the whole book.

This step is not necessary, although it's very helpful.

yukamina wrote:

I don't know about ahibba here, but lots of people know about certain languages without knowing/studying the language itself.

This is what I tried to make Musashi understand!

Last edited by ahibba (2009 June 29, 7:18 pm)