User talk:Retropunk/Japanese Curriculum/Outline/Beginner Lessons/Grammar

Purpose
What is the purpose of this page and should it develop at all? --Swift (talk) 05:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's the grammar points page. It's my developed list of points a contributor can use.  The page will need to be developed more to state this, and I'll  (or someone else) get to it sooner or later. -- Retropunk (talk) 06:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Might it be a good idea to merge this with Japanese/Practical Lessons/Syllabus and its lesson plan? As you pointed out on Talk:Japanese, it needs a grammar list. While the syllabus is split into five levels, the first two seem to follow the JLPT 3 and 4 vocabulary specs. Could you have a look over the syllabus and see if the this grammar list can be merged gracefully into Stage 1 (conforming with the function and topics of Stage I without covering those of Stage II). --Swift (talk) 13:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked at that before, and the grammar portion is way too simplified. Why wait until "Stage 2" to add "questions, answers and commands" and "requests" ... sounds a bit too trivial to me.  This is mostly in the JLPT4 grammar spec. -- Retropunk (talk) 16:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * How about merging the two stages or splitting the grammar points up between the two? Not feasible? Maybe not necessary, but the two can coexist? --Swift (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think first you need to take a step back - why would it make sense to "make commands, requests ..." in Stage 2. Can JLPT4 exist in Stage 2 with JLPT3 vocab? Sure.  Can we split JLPT4 into Stage1/2.  Sure.  Should we?  I don't know.  It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to go through the proposed vocab for Stage 1 until you teaching what's proposed in Stage2.  A reader is going to get tired of learning the V-masu form over and over again, and maybe some of the V-te forms.  Perhaps I'll go through the JLPT3 grammar and see what's available before we try to merge anything.  Please be aware that the JLPT is going into five levels next year (actually December was the last test with four levels).  It's going to five levels for the next level.  JLPT4/3 will be the same, but named N5/4.  N3 will be somewhere between JLPT3 and 2.  Also, be aware that I have yet to take JLPT4.. let alone JLPT3.  I'll do my best as there's plenty of information to my disposal.
 * I understand that you want to try and perserve some of that page. It's a decent page - although a lot of it was skimmed from the guide.  I'll need to read the guide some and see if it's just superfluous information or not.  I'm assuming it is - as it really doesn't make sense.  -- Retropunk (talk) 08:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Great points, thanks. I am, indeed, interested in preserving that page. Not so much for the sake of the page as for the sake of not squandering the time that went into it. If we can use it to save us some work, that would be great. If not, then we should either label this clearly as just one approach of several and link to your's, or delete it. I haven't really looked into this much at all and would appreciate your continued input on it. --Swift (talk) 17:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I think instead of giving competency levels as ability to make statements/questions/requests, we should just link in the grammar competency and/or state the person should be able to pass the JLPT3 (N4) level. The framework cited in the page is targeted to all kids from ages of 6 to 18.  I think just remove the grammar examples given in Stage 1.  Remove the "should be able to make commands..." and just cite that they should be able to speak/understand small sentences and maybe understand the more complex sentences via reading.  -- Retropunk (talk) 01:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. The syllabus seems to live up to its name being "practical" in terms of how usable the material is, but is maybe not the most efficient way of learning since many grammatical topics will overlap between functional topics. I guess merging them might not be feasible. Still, maybe we should keep it as another lesson plan so that future editors who disagree with your approach don't mess it up trying to recreate something along these lines. --Swift (talk) 04:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Move this to Japanese
Seeing how you're not working on this any more, Retropunk, would you mind if we moved this from your user-space to the Japanese book. This will probably be the seeds to a lesson plan and it would be useful to have it around to reference or mold. Should you wish to keep a copy here, could you possibly copy it somewhere (just to keep the attribution).

I'm thinking it might be useful to have it at Japanese/Grammar (as it would make linking between it and the grammar pages fairly straight forward) or some sub-page of it. What do you think? --Swift (talk) 13:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought I already replied to this, but I guess I never saved it. Moving the page as a subpage of Japanese/Grammar sounds find.  --Retropunk (talk) 04:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * OK. I suggest we just put it at that page to begin with. I don't think we'll have much in the way of more advanced lessons anytime soon (unless you'd like to compile a list of grammar points for JLPT 3/N4). I'm going to go over these slowly and see if I get inspired to create a set of successive lessons. --Swift (talk) 16:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The page mentioned above has now been moved from Japanese/Grammar to Sugu ni Hajimemashō. --Swift (talk) 00:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)