edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) (12/21/85)
In article <6711@boring.UUCP> tomi@boring.UUCP (Tetsuo Tomiyama) writes: >> hard to learn. In order to read the Japanese newspaper a Japanese >> native child must go as far as 9th grade to get the basic Kanji, >> into high school to get the rest of the 2000 general Kanji just >> to learn to read the langauge!!!!! This is not true with english >> or probably any other western langauge. ( It is often heard noted >> about the American with the 6th grade Education.) > >This is not correct. A Japanese child is supposed to learn about >900 Kanji until the 6th grade. To 'learn' means here to get an ability >both to read and to write. Until the end of the 9th grade, he/she must >read ALL the 'commonly used' Kanji which count about 2500; otherwise, >you cannot read a newspaper. In high school, he/she is supposed to >read and write all of them. Sorry about that. I guess what really was trying to emphasize is that it is easier for a young native english speaker to read a common everyday Newspaper then it is for a young native Japanese. In addition a typical Japanese student goes to school more ( 6 days a week) may have juku ( after school lessons) (I also beleive the school year is longer ??) and probably actually studies. The first time I actually had to study was in College. > >Now, the problem is that he thinks this type of painful learning >never happens in learning Hindo-European languages. But, how do you >explain irregularity of English spellings? It is almost the same as >learning Kanji, in my opinion. This type of just painful learning >SURELY can occur western languages. How about Germans, for example? >You have to learn by heart "der Buch", "das Kind", etc., don't you? >How about English? You have to learn "foot-feet", "man-men", >"woman-women", etc., don't you? > In old england the spelling of a word changed with the pronunciation. It no longer does. I agree the spelling iregularities should be resolved. The pain may just as great but not knowing how to correctly spell a word does not prevent you from correctly reading it. I don't know how many times I've looked at a familiar Kanji, Kanji that I can write, but can't place the meaning to it, or sound. The trouble is not learning it, the trouble is keeping the meaning the sound and how to write it all at the same time. Japanese also have similiar concepts. Take for instance "okane" (money with polite marking) and "gokinjo" ( neighborhood with polite marking). The difference in the markings are resolved by where the word originated (usually). I forget the exact details but I think one is for Japanese words and the other is for chinese words. Still not knowing whether its der, die or das usually does not prevent you from writing or reading the main word. Try writing the wrong kanji for the word, does the same still hold true ? No. I think not. >> >> A single Chinese character in Japanese has usually at least two >> and the common (irregular or sort of) characters have multiple >> readings !!!! Some are often bizarre. Many of the Japanese >> > >This is not correct. A single Chinese character may have two ways of >pronunciation (but absolutely has single meaning). One may be an >approximation of the original Chinese pronunciation which is very >regular; the other is derived from the meaning and expressed in a >Japanese own way which might be irregular but this is what you have to >remember. Now, the real problem is that there's no linkage between these >two. So, they are not *bizarre* at all as you think! I said some are often bizarre (not all). Sometimes parents in thinking of a name for there child will create totally new readings (sounds) for a particular kanji(s) (is this not bizarre ??). Some characters were taken from chinese only for sound. Some kanji do have multiple readings. For instance the word for sun (hi) can be read as "ni" as in "nihon" or "nichi" as in "nichiyoobi", or as "ta" (??) as in "ashita" or "o" as in "kyoo" (meaning today), and there are more. >> (nihonjin no kanajo ga iru mo.) > >Finally, what is this? I am sorry, but I don't understand this >Japanese-look-like sentence. > Forgive my romanji japanese. Writing japanese in romanji is as strange to me as it probably is to you. But this brings out another point, the typical american understands poorly spoken english, and heavily accented english. I don't believe this is true for the typical Japanese. Ima watashi no kanajo wa nihon ni modotte, juku o oshiete iru. Kanajo wa mochiron nihonjin desu. Kanajo wa sugu america ni kaette kuru to omoimasu.