Talk:Japanese/Archive 1

Hi there. You've already stated that you know there is already a Japanese wikibook so I don't have to inform you about that, but I think you should know that there are already plans (and a lot of progress!) for improving the Japanese wikibook. lastguru and a few others are creating an entirely new set of lessons. I would recommend you take a look at this and see if you can contribute there.

When these new lessons are complete (or nearly complete), they will replace the old lessons and the old lessons will be moved to appendices until it is deemed that they are no longer needed (ie, their content has been integrated into the new lessons). Also, we are going to split up the lessons and reference information into different sections to make the book much more useful and easier to foloow. If you are interested, you should sign up to the japanese-wiki mailing list (there are instructions on the Japanese discussion page.

Finally, I should point out that this book is probably in violation of wikibook policy because it has the same topic, goals and audience as an existing wikibook. I hope you'll think about helping out with the exising Japanese wikibook, because the entire structure of the Japanese wikibook *is* changing.


 * &mdash; Sik0fewl 02:08, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Good start, but...
There's some real fundamental issues here. First of all, the basic course introduces text right off the bat without introducing syllabaries so the learner can learn to read said text.

The book is also geared towards speaking, and yet, having used a similar system and then gone to Japan myself, it's not useful to teach anything besides words and grammar. It is impossible to start a conversation by talking about the weather unless you have something to follow it up with.

I also would take issue with the romanization system that is proposed (the hougen page for example). Using the so-called "Japanese educational" system is rather useless, as no English-language textbooks (and therefore no English speaking learners) are ever going to use it, because it looks odd to English speakers to render shi as si, etc. Also, nine times out of ten, the Japanese will shorten long vowels or introduce an h (Ôno becomes Ono or Ohno), not use the "email romaji system" of spelling out long vowels in romanization. This is also 9 times out of 10 out of the 1 time out of a hundred they would actually need to romanize at all.

Also, on the Japanese Wiki, furigana are generally not used, simply because they are too small to read (which is evident here), and I would suggest not using them, especially in the beginner's section. Anyone who can read them likely doesn't need a beginner's course anyway.

So I think some of the structure needs http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Japanese&action=edit&section=1to be reworked in order for this book to do what it is supposed to. MSJapan 18:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree entirely. I think the book should start with an introduction to cultural and general linguistic information rather than simply throwing readers into a lesson (or rather a messy menu). Then talk about pronunciation and introduce the kana, and so forth. Take a look at the Chinese Wikibook for ideas.
 * On a sidenote, I'll point out that some Japanese textbooks do use that romanization system (Beginning Japanese by Eleanor Harz Jorden and Hamako Ito Chaplin, for example), but I agree that it's not common or useful enough to warrant using it here. I suggest the more common modified Hepburn system, which uses the expected shi and such, with macrons for long vowels (or you could double them) and an apostrophe after any syllabic n (ん) that precedes a vowel. --WurdBendur 02:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If a person were to try and learn Japanese from this site, they would give up shortly after trying to navigate through it. A lot of things were merged haphazardly and it's rather difficult to learn much at all.  Some things are stated twice and some pages are vastly different from 'group' pages (like the vocabulary pages.)   It's a discombobulating mess that needs to be heavily edited. I agree about the Furigana, but the modified hepburn system should be very useful as long as the kana is used. Retropunk 06:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Change the approach!
You can't teach Japanese to a novice learner by continually referring to different writing scripts, kana, kanji, grammatical jargon, and especially the plain form.

To write a Japanese textbook, you need to lay down the basics in the です／ます form and ONLY then do you teach plain form structure to assist with grammatical patterns, and the only do you give them enough know-how to converse and write in both styles of the language.

Romaji is a crutch.
Both Japanese and Japanese/Guide are excellent and noble beginnings to Japanese learning wikibooks. However, the kana is a crucial first step in learning the language. People that start learning Japanese with romaji typically have a horribly hard time giving it up. I am completely self-taught, and after speaking to several Japanese teachers, and my brother (14 years of immersive Japanese, and basically fluent), I made the plunge by learning the kana first. I have several friends that speak (some) Japanese as well, and those that started with romaji end up still using it, even years later, to "write" Japanese things out. One learned this way in college, and another in the U.S. military, and both constantly fall back on it. In order for people that want to use these guides to start learning Japanese, the site should offer a kana version, and encourage the kana to be the first step in learning.

If people have a hard time learning the kana based on the lessons on this site, there is a (relatively) inexpensive alternative. I cannot say enough good things about the book "Remembering the Kana" by James Heisig (ISBN 4889960724 -- a mere US$10.17 at amazon.com). I literally learned all the kana in a single weekend, and my retention is near perfect, even when reading quickly. Mr. Heisig's method and execution in this book is incredible, and I use his "Remembering the Kanji" series as well to supplement my kanji learning.

'''To all prospective Japanese students... KANA IS CRUCIAL! Learn it ASAP, and you will thank yourself later!''' Depending on who you ask, some people seem to think that you can get by in Japan on just romaji, based on the large amount of roman text/english seen everywhere. However, while you may be able to find the resturaunt with it's nice "english" sign, good luck finding a menu that you can read. Nearly every western influenced place has the menu written nearly entirely in katakana. Interestingly enough, many Japanese struggle with romaji, and have to sound things out and then figure out what they are supposed to mean. For example, when attempting to find my hotel on my last trip, the guidebook had the name and address written in english. The taxi driver was lost trying to figure out what the address was, but I quickly wrote it down in kana for him, and he caught on immediately (for those wondering why I didn't just say it to him, addresses in Tokyo, where most streets are unnamed, are completely insane and complicated... it was easier to just write it down and hand it to him).

I think the first couple of lessons in japanese should have both romaji and kana. Then by the 3rd or 4th chapter stop using romaji. It will give learners a chance to learn vocabulary words they can try to spell out with hiragana and katakana and make them feel like they are still learning japanese until they get to the point where they can read vocab lists and such without romaji. Once people get a taste for how easy basic japanese grammar is, they will want to learn the writting system.

Also, I was thinking maybe we should make a workbook to go with the text book. That way there are assignments people can use to practice what they learn in each chapter.


 * I agree 100%. Getting to used to romaji is really bad for ones studies. Personally, I used romaji a lot when I learned at home, then I moved to Japan (where I'm currently living) and since then I've never used romaji outside of internet conversations with friends who can't read kana. Romaji is just.. useless, and can even confuse things. - (Tobberoth 17:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC))


 * Agree likewise. This textbook is a farce while using roomaji. 24.60.58.198 00:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I totally DISagree! I know several people who can speak Japanese FLUENTLY, but can't read a single kana or kanji. It is very well possible to learn Japanese in roomaji, lots of Japanese course books are written in roomaji only! Moreover, people should make their own choice HOW to learn Japanese. We should NOT force them to study a complicated writing system if they don't want to. I do agree it is much more helpful to also learn the writing system, esp. if you ever want to live in Japan, but it is not up to us or to anybody else for them to decide whether or not they should learn it.
 * I think it's best to make the courses in kanji/kana AND in roomaji. Everybody can then decide for themselves to go the 'easy' way or the 'hard' way. 真実 - Shinjitsu To my Talk page! 22:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * If the goal of this book is verbal fluency, then you are absolutely right in saying that the use of romaji does not matter. However, if the goal is fluency in all aspects of Japanese, then I must disagree in saying romaji is okay. You even said, "I know several people who can speak Japanese FLUENTLY", so if literacy is not a reader's top priority, it is fine. We could include both romaji and kana/kanji by hiding romaji inside a collapsible div.--Balloonguy 23:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * A collapsible div? That sounds like a good idea. But I am also afraid that contributers will find it difficult to use a div like that. I must say that even I don't know how to do it and I have been around on Wikipedia/Wikibooks (esp. first) for a while now. Moreover, who is going to build in all those divs on the existing pages now? I haven't even got enough time to work on the Japanese itself, though my hands are itchy. ;-) Ja ne! 真実 - Shinjitsu To my Talk page! 23:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

PDF and Printable Versions
I'd like to see pdf versions of this book and printable versions of this book, as they have done in the Chinese wikibook. Are there plans for this?
 * I wouldn't recommend a PDF version of the book until it's heavily cleaned up. There's no one wanting to take the reins and the last 'drastic' change ended up being stalemated as no one continued or really agreed upon propsed changes. Retropunk 09:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Development?
Is there any active development taking place? I want to make sure before I start working on this.--Balloonguy 15:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Go for it. The book is already pretty much fragmented and the yahoo group is pretty much dead. ;) Retropunk 05:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I would love for this book to be developed, and being a total newbie to the whole wikibooks project thing, i might just like to edit this page every so often as a learning tool for me, and for my friends who are studying japanese. given my limited knowledge about wikibooks, this will be a slow process :)


 * any feedback is greatly appreciated.
 * Coxy345 04:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Ed

Plan
I have sort of made a plan concerning the japanese wikibook here. Please give me your comments, changes that need to be made, etc.--


 * Special kana rules should probably be deleted. All of that is already explained before hand in the kana lessons i think.


 * Also I think everything on the Japanese/Introduction page should be moved onto the Japanese/Contents page. There is not really a need for such a small page, all of the information can be laid out at the top of the contents under an introduction heading. Ikarsik 00:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Commented out link to introduction from this page. Intro is still linked from the getting started heading on contents page, but I moved all the links on introduction page under getting started heading. Ikarsik 00:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with all your changes.--Balloonguy 13:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Navigation
We need to come up with a good navigation--Balloonguy 21:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC) template.