New Kenkyusha
Jim Breen
of the big green JE dictionary. It goes on sale next month. See:
http://www.kenkyusha.co.jp/wadai5/wadai500.html
Apparently it's about 40% bigger, and a (for me) wlecome change is
that the headwords are be in kana.
--
Jim Breen (j.breen(a)csse.monash.edu.au http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/)
Computer Science & Software Engineering, Tel: +61 3 9905 3298
Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia Fax: +61 3 9905 5146
(Monash Provider No. 00008C) ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>Kenkyusha has just announced the release of the new (5th) edition
>of the big green JE dictionary. It goes on sale next month. See:
>
> http://www.kenkyusha.co.jp/wadai5/wadai500.html
>
>Apparently it's about 40% bigger, and a (for me) wlecome change is
>that the headwords are be in kana.
Great! I was going to pick up a Kenkyusha in September, so I'm glad
to see this.
-Chris
Kevin Gowen
Where are you going to be placed? I suspect you should have heard by now.
--
Kevin Gowen
Charles Eicher
>
>Kenkyusha has just announced the release of the new (5th) edition
>of the big green JE dictionary. It goes on sale next month. See:
>
> http://www.kenkyusha.co.jp/wadai5/wadai500.html
>
>Apparently it's about 40% bigger, and a (for me) wlecome change is
>that the headwords are be in kana.
Oh no! I liked their odd romaji headwords with macrons over the long vowels. If
you don't quite catch the long/short vowels in spoken words, it's easy to find
them because ou is right next to o, etc.
Now the big question is, are the entries indexed in kana order? I didn't see
anything about that in a brief reading of the announcement.
masakim
"Charles Eicher" wrote: .
>
> Oh no! I liked their odd romaji headwords with macrons over the long
> vowels. If you don't quite catch the long/short vowels in spoken words,
> it's easy to find them because ou is right next to o, etc.
> Now the big question is, are the entries indexed in kana order? I didn't
> see anything about that in a brief reading of the announcement.
>
旧版のローマ字見出しから、かな見出しへと画期的に変貌。
Completely changed into kana midashi.
Regards,
masakim
Chris Kern
>
>Where are you going to be placed? I suspect you should have heard by now.
Tochigi-shi, tochigi-ken.
-Chris
Jim Breen
>Now the big question is, are the entries indexed in kana order? I didn't see
>anything about that in a brief reading of the announcement.
No, they are in the Unicode code-point order of the unsimplified
version of the kanji they would have been written in if they had been
written in kanji.
I suppose the イロハ version will come out later....
Charles Eicher
>
>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>>Now the big question is, are the entries indexed in kana order? I didn't see
>>anything about that in a brief reading of the announcement.
>
>No, they are in the Unicode code-point order of the unsimplified
>version of the kanji they would have been written in if they had been
>written in kanji.
>
>I suppose the イロハ version will come out later....
All joking aside, I can't understand why everyone complains about the romaji and
English alphabetic order in the Kenkyusha JE. I like the old headword/ordering
method, it's very fast to use for native English speakers. While I usually do
everything possible to avoid romaji, in this case, I think it's the best method
for native English JSL students.
If this new edition is in kana order, it would drive me crazy. But that's
probably because I never used a kana-ordered dictionary enough to get used to
it. I suppose I could live with it, but lookups would never be as fast as the
English dictionary order I've used since I was a little kid.
Jim Breen
>All joking aside, I can't understand why everyone complains about the romaji and
>English alphabetic order in the Kenkyusha JE. I like the old headword/ordering
>method, it's very fast to use for native English speakers. While I usually do
>everything possible to avoid romaji, in this case, I think it's the best method
>for native English JSL students.
That's why I'm glad the GG has got away from it. It's not a book for
"English JSL students"; it's a reference book for Japanese NSs. Kenkyusha
has had this historical thing about romanized headwords for its JE
dictionaries, and I'm glad it has finally ditched it. When I use a paper
JE dictionary, it is usually a kana-headword one. (Sanseido, Kodansha,
Taishukan, ...)
>If this new edition is in kana order, it would drive me crazy. But that's
>probably because I never used a kana-ordered dictionary enough to get used to
>it. I suppose I could live with it, but lookups would never be as fast as the
>English dictionary order I've used since I was a little kid.
Time you learned to walk, Charles. When I first got a kana-headword dictionary
years ago it was a small challenge, but well worth it.
Hirofumi Nagamura
> Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>
>>All joking aside, I can't understand why everyone complains about the romaji and
>>English alphabetic order in the Kenkyusha JE. I like the old headword/ordering
>>method, it's very fast to use for native English speakers. While I usually do
>>everything possible to avoid romaji, in this case, I think it's the best method
>>for native English JSL students.
>
> That's why I'm glad the GG has got away from it. It's not a book for
> "English JSL students"; it's a reference book for Japanese NSs. Kenkyusha
> has had this historical thing about romanized headwords for its JE
> dictionaries, and I'm glad it has finally ditched it. When I use a paper
> JE dictionary, it is usually a kana-headword one. (Sanseido, Kodansha,
> Taishukan, ...)
I wouldn't be surprised if the Kenkyusha was losing sales precisely
because of its romaji headwords. We have both the Kenkyusha and
Taishukan JEs at our juku, but I've noticed that almost none of the
students use the Kenkyusha. I once actually saw a new student open
the Kenkyusha and say "Wa! Roomaji-yan!" and immediately put it back
on the shelf. Another student thought it was an EE dictionary; she
didn't recognize that the funny characters were Japanese!
The prestige value of the Kenkyusha was probably what allowed it to
get away with its romaji until now. Now that its prestige value is
much less than it used to be (not that the Kenkyusha has gotten any
worse, but the competition has been catching up), keeping the romaji
may well be suicidal.
Cheers,
--
Hirofumi Nagamura
Kobe, Japan
David Chien
pickup. Just try using it translating a short story or something, and
you'll quickly learn to flip through the dictionaries by heart/kana.
In any case, getting used to both types of dictionaries will only help
when later you encounter lists, book stores, whatnot ordered one way or
the other that you have to dig through to find something.
Jed Rothwell
> Oh no! I liked their odd romaji headwords with macrons over the long
vowels. If
> you don't quite catch the long/short vowels in spoken words, it's easy to
find
> them because ou is right next to o, etc.
I agree. Even a N.S. sometimes has this problem. I like the peculiar old
romanization they used, and I have difficulty remembering the kana-alphabet
order. However, this is a moot point for me, because I would never go back
to a paper dictionary, except in rare cases when the electronic version
fails. I will stick to my 1954 KKS for that. Actually, I usually turn to the
electronic Kojien when the J-E dictionary is not enough.
They should publish this in one of these hand-held electronic gadgets. I
like the Seiko ones best. As far as I know they have only published the
tyuujiten in electronic format. They should do the biggie one.
That announcement is cute, with the reference to the "Green Goddess." They
have English N.S. editors now. That's progress.
- Jed
Louise Bremner Louise Bremner
> Kenkyusha has just announced the release of the new (5th) edition
> of the big green JE dictionary. It goes on sale next month. See:
>
> http://www.kenkyusha.co.jp/wadai5/wadai500.html
Is it my browser (IE 5.1.4 on the Mac), or is that very strange
formatting? Two-character-wide columns of text on a page that scrolls
horizontally for at least five screen-fulls?
>
> Apparently it's about 40% bigger, and a (for me) wlecome change is
> that the headwords are be in kana.
And has the quaint English of the examples been edited too?
________________________________________________________________________
Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!
Kevin Wayne Williams
> Is it my browser (IE 5.1.4 on the Mac), or is that very strange
> formatting? Two-character-wide columns of text on a page that scrolls
> horizontally for at least five screen-fulls?
Comes up quite normally on Mozilla 1.4A. A quick look at the site didn't
show anything particularly peculiar in the HTML.
KWW
Jim Breen
>Jim Breen <jwbR...@csse.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> Apparently it's about 40% bigger, and a (for me) welcome change is
>> that the headwords are in kana.
>And has the quaint English of the examples been edited too?
According to Tom Gally, who was free-lancing at Kenkyusha during the
last year or so, yes.
Charles Eicher
>
>Louise Bremner Louise Bremner <dame_...@yahoo.com> dixit:
>>Jim Breen <jwbR...@csse.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> Apparently it's about 40% bigger, and a (for me) welcome change is
>>> that the headwords are in kana.
>
>>And has the quaint English of the examples been edited too?
>
>According to Tom Gally, who was free-lancing at Kenkyusha during the
>last year or so, yes.
Darn it, they're taking all the fun right out of the dictionary.
Kevin Gowen
Why don't you give them an irate phone call?
--
Kevin Gowen
Darrien
> > Is it my browser (IE 5.1.4 on the Mac), or is that very strange
> > formatting? Two-character-wide columns of text on a page that scrolls
> > horizontally for at least five screen-fulls?
>
> Comes up quite normally on Mozilla 1.4A. A quick look at the site didn't
> show anything particularly peculiar in the HTML.
>
It renders fine for me too, but http://validator.w3.org didn't seem to like it
very much.
Don Kirkman
article <hNNHa.40451$Bw2....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>:
Renders fine in Opera 7.11 under Win98SE.
--
Don
don...@covad.net
Ronchan
news:bclj8...@drn.newsguy.com...
The Romaji headings in Kenkyusha were not logical, as all other dictionaries
are with KANA indexes.
I am not an native english speaker and I am using KANA dictionaries since
the first year I started studying Japanese.
It is not harder or easier, it is just what you are used too.
Further Kenkyusha is a Japanese - English ditionary, and with that is it is
more logical that it is made for Japanese
and not foreigners.
I think a lot of people in Japan and outside will be happy with this change!
Certainly my former tutors, because they always encouraged pupils to NOT use
Romaji and always use KANA (also for making wordlists ect.).
Kenkyusha didn't fit in this, but now it does!
Ronald.
Jed Rothwell
> Further Kenkyusha is a Japanese - English ditionary, and with that is it
is
> more logical that it is made for Japanese
> and not foreigners.
Most translators I know translate into their own native language. In other
words, Japanese NS translate into Japanese, and I translate Japanese into
English. So I need the J-E dictionary more often than they do, and they need
the E-J dictionary more often.
However, few non-native speakers read Japanese. Nearly all J-E and E-J
dictionaries are sold to Japanese people, so in that respect you are right.
The dictionaries should be arranged for the convenience of Japanese people.
If they prefer kana-order, that's how the book should be. I suppose
Kenkyusha did some market studies to find out what their customers want.
Anyway, I do not know anyone who uses paper dictionaries anymore. I am
surprised there is still a market for them. The other day I read that Encyc.
Britannica is selling paper encyclopedias again, and sales are good. I guess
many people still buy paper reference books. My guess is that most of these
books will end up on the shelf, seldom used. People who really need
reference books use battered electronic ones or computer-based versions.
- Jed
Charles Eicher
>
>The Romaji headings in Kenkyusha were not logical, as all other dictionaries
>are with KANA indexes.
The romaji listings in the Kenkyusha are entirely logical and self-consistent.
Just because it doesn't
conform to other systems does not mean their system is illogical.
>I am not an native english speaker and I am using KANA dictionaries since
>the first year I started studying Japanese.
Yet here you are, conversing in English about Japanese. When I studied at a
language school in
Japan with students from around the world, the only common language was English.
I often hear of
students using English study materials because there is nothing available in
their native language.
>It is not harder or easier, it is just what you are used too.
>Further Kenkyusha is a Japanese - English ditionary, and with that is it is
>more logical that it is made for Japanese
>and not foreigners.
>I think a lot of people in Japan and outside will be happy with this change!
>Certainly my former tutors, because they always encouraged pupils to NOT use
>Romaji and always use KANA (also for making wordlists ect.).
>Kenkyusha didn't fit in this, but now it does!
The no-romaji advice is usually just for beginners. Once you get to a certain
level, it isn't so
destructive to your normal reading skills. We often used romaji in advanced
level classes when
studying tough linguistic issues that aren't easily represented with kana only.
Ronald
news:RalIa.3310$C83.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Ronchan writes:
>
> Anyway, I do not know anyone who uses paper dictionaries anymore. I am
> surprised there is still a market for them.
>
I agree. Personally I use 研究社英和和英中辞典CDROM版 for daily use.
Nevertheless, Nelson and my J-E 4th edition Kenkyuusha are sometimes
necessary because words aren't included in the CDROM version.
Does anyone know if Kenkyusha is also going to make a 第五版大辞典 on CDROM?
Ronald
> In article <3ef16eec$0$28908$edd6...@news.versatel.net>, "Ronchan"
says...
> >
>
> >The Romaji headings in Kenkyusha were not logical, as all other
dictionaries
> >are with KANA indexes.
>
> The romaji listings in the Kenkyusha are entirely logical and
self-consistent.
> Just because it doesn't
> conform to other systems does not mean their system is illogical.
>
The system itself is logical. But only the fact that you have at least
two different transcriptions for ROMAJI (Hepburn and Yale), is one big
reason not to use it. The Japanese already made a logical system
for their language, why not use it? It is a product of the period in which
"the west" had the arrogance to reform anything the wanted to their own
needs.
> >I am not an native english speaker and I am using KANA dictionaries since
> >the first year I started studying Japanese.
>
> Yet here you are, conversing in English about Japanese. When I studied at
a
> language school in Japan with students from around the world, the only
common language was English.
> I often hear of
> students using English study materials because there is nothing available
in
> their native language.
I would like to discuss in an other language with you when you want!
And why was the common language English?? Everybody was learning Japanese,
weren't they?
Why not use Japanese than? That is the quickest way to learn to speak it
quickly!
Also much material on Japan and Japanese is widely available in French and
German.
A lot of people forget that. There is even a Dutch-Japanese v.v. Dictionary
in the market.
But what does this have to do with the discussion on KANA or ROMAJI?
> >It is not harder or easier, it is just what you are used too.
> >Further Kenkyusha is a Japanese - English ditionary, and with that is it
is
> >more logical that it is made for Japanese
> >and not foreigners.
> >I think a lot of people in Japan and outside will be happy with this
change!
> >Certainly my former tutors, because they always encouraged pupils to NOT
use
> >Romaji and always use KANA (also for making wordlists ect.).
> >Kenkyusha didn't fit in this, but now it does!
>
> The no-romaji advice is usually just for beginners. Once you get to a
certain
> level, it isn't so
> destructive to your normal reading skills. We often used romaji in
advanced
> level classes when
> studying tough linguistic issues that aren't easily represented with kana
only.
>
True, it is not destructive, but I stick with my point, why to use a certain
system, when 120 million native people
are using another system (and probably more suitable)?
And further, I can't imagine any linguistic issue that can't easily be
represented with Kana!
How do Japanese learn these issues than at their schools? In romaji? I don't
think so...
Ronald.
Ronald
news:RalIa.3310$C83.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Ronchan writes:
> However, few non-native speakers read Japanese.
All my friends and study mates are non-native Japanese and all speak, read
and write Japanese.
Further I have a lot of friends at Leuven-Uni (also non-native) and they all
speak, read and write Japanese.
Also friends from Oxford all speak, read and write Japanese.
And of course NOT in Romaji :-)
In my experience, all the translators (also interpreters) who I have met,
can speak, read and write in Japanese.
On what evidence to you base this point?
Ronald.
Jed Rothwell
> All my friends and study mates are non-native Japanese and all speak, read
> and write Japanese.
How many friends and study mates do you have? Compare that number to the
population of Japanese native speakers who study English and might need J-E,
E-J dictionaries.
> On what evidence to you base this point?
Books & magazine articles describing the number of people in the U.S. who
have studied Japanese, or who say they can speak it. The numbers are far
smaller than the number of Japanese who study English; millions compared to
thousands.
If the Kenkyusha corporation were to invest as much money in a book for
English speakers as they have put into this dictionary, it would go
bankrupt. The potential market is too small for a printed publication. If NS
of English or other languages ever get a giant, comprehensive dictionary
designed exclusively for their needs, it will be in an electronic format,
like the WWWJDICT, and much of it will be automatically converted from
something like the Kenkyusha (KKS).
Naturally, I am aware of the many fine dictionaries and textbooks for
English speakers, from Breen, Hadamitzky & Spahn, Martin and others. I do
not think that a paper copy of these works will ever be as gigantic or as
comprehensive as the KKS, although Martin comes close.
For my purposes, I suppose an electronic version of the full KKS would be as
good as anything written for English speakers. I cannot imagine many
improvements that would help. There are smaller, special reference books for
the special problems English speakers may have, such as Martin. I see no
need for anything more comprehensive. The only major improvement I see on
the horizon will be an offshoot of browser and e-book technology, not
something that an author or a team of authors compose. As I have mentioned
here before, I look forward to the day when all of the text I deal with is
available in electronic format, along with all of the reference books such
as dictionaries. That way, I will be able to dump the kanji altogether,
convert everything into Romaji, and feed the text into something like the
WWWJDICT to generate a glossary. That will save a lot of time and effort,
and reduce errors. Unlike many participants here, I have no romantic
attachment to kanji. I think they are a pain in the butt. They are kind of
pretty, but totally unnecessary and pointless as a means of communication. I
deal with Japanese strictly for utilitarian purposes or because I want to
know the content -- what the author has in mind.
Actually, most of the scientific papers I deal with *are* electronic now,
thank goodness. I cannot yet conveniently convert them to romanization, or
have them read aloud by the computer. The latter would be very handy. I like
to listen to the original text while I read my translation, to check for
stuff that I accidentally left out or mangled. When the translation is
important, such as a book or a paper for a peer-reviewed journal, I usually
have a NS read the whole thing aloud (preferably the author). I play back
the tape so many times I memorize long segments. Nowadays you can put the
recording into the computer, which is handy.
- Jed
Charles Eicher
>
>"Charles Eicher" <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
>news:bcsrn...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> In article <3ef16eec$0$28908$edd6...@news.versatel.net>, "Ronchan"
>says...
>> >
>>
>> >The Romaji headings in Kenkyusha were not logical, as all other
>dictionaries
>> >are with KANA indexes.
>>
>> The romaji listings in the Kenkyusha are entirely logical and
>self-consistent.
>> Just because it doesn't
>> conform to other systems does not mean their system is illogical.
>>
>
>The system itself is logical. But only the fact that you have at least
>two different transcriptions for ROMAJI (Hepburn and Yale), is one big
>reason not to use it.
I never heard of any "Yale" system, just Hepburn and kunreishiki. You must be
using that horrid, obsolete Jordan book.
The Kenkyusha uses Hepburn, except with macrons, which most books don't use
because it's a pain to typeset. Bravo to Kenkyusha for going to extra effort to
use macrons.
>The Japanese already made a logical system
>for their language, why not use it?
Because kunreshiki sucks, and is not particularly good at expressing the native
pronunciation to nonnative speakers. That's why kunreishiki was supplanted by
Hepburn. That's why Kenkyusha used Hepburn.
>It is a product of the period in which
>"the west" had the arrogance to reform anything the wanted to their own
>needs.
What, you mean the 15th century, when the Dutch East Indies Company claimed
Japan as a trading colony?
>> >I am not an native english speaker and I am using KANA dictionaries since
>> >the first year I started studying Japanese.
>>
>> Yet here you are, conversing in English about Japanese. When I studied at
>a
>> language school in Japan with students from around the world, the only
>common language was English.
>> I often hear of
>> students using English study materials because there is nothing available
>in
>> their native language.
>
>I would like to discuss in an other language with you when you want!
>And why was the common language English?? Everybody was learning Japanese,
>weren't they?
>Why not use Japanese than? That is the quickest way to learn to speak it
>quickly!
Yeah right, I'm going to speak Japanese with someone taking their first week of
Japanese classes? We had a Japanese-only rule at school, which lasted about an
hour.
>Also much material on Japan and Japanese is widely available in French and
>German.
>A lot of people forget that. There is even a Dutch-Japanese v.v. Dictionary
>in the market.
Right, I guess that's why the Dutch students in my overseas classes were all
using JE dictionaries.
>But what does this have to do with the discussion on KANA or ROMAJI?
I don't know, it's your rant, not mine. But let me know if you find a
Japanese-Turkish or a Japanese-Serbo-Croatian dictionary as comprehensive as the
romaji Kenkyusha. That's why it's been the standard for so many years.
>> >It is not harder or easier, it is just what you are used too.
>> >Further Kenkyusha is a Japanese - English ditionary, and with that is it
>is
>> >more logical that it is made for Japanese
>> >and not foreigners.
>> >I think a lot of people in Japan and outside will be happy with this
>change!
>> >Certainly my former tutors, because they always encouraged pupils to NOT
>use
>> >Romaji and always use KANA (also for making wordlists ect.).
>> >Kenkyusha didn't fit in this, but now it does!
>>
>> The no-romaji advice is usually just for beginners. Once you get to a
>certain
>> level, it isn't so
>> destructive to your normal reading skills. We often used romaji in
>advanced
>> level classes when
>> studying tough linguistic issues that aren't easily represented with kana
>only.
>>
>
>True, it is not destructive,
No, it IS destructive, your kana skills atrophy when you spend time reading
romaji instead of kanji. But dictionary lookups are different, you're only
reading ONE word in romaji.
>but I stick with my point, why to use a certain
>system, when 120 million native people
>are using another system (and probably more suitable)?
Because it isn't always more suitable?
>And further, I can't imagine any linguistic issue that can't easily be
>represented with Kana!
You haven't gotten very far in your studies, I can tell. Here's a simple example
from a common textbook:
ik/u/ + eru = ikeru
The romaji is used to explain the root's transformation more easily. This is a
dumb example, but there are plenty more where that came from, when you're ready
for them.
>How do Japanese learn these issues than at their schools? In romaji? I don't
>think so...
You think that Japanese kids are mute until someone teaches them the language in
a school? I bet you every Japanese kid knows how to conjugate verbs before they
ever enter kindergarten. I bet every US school teaches at least a few bits of
their Japanese verb conjugation lessons in romaji.
Curt Fischer
Ronald wrote:
>
> "Charles Eicher" <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
> news:bcsrn...@drn.newsguy.com...
> >
> > The no-romaji advice is usually just for beginners. Once you get to a
> certain
> > level, it isn't so
> > destructive to your normal reading skills. We often used romaji in
> advanced
> > level classes when
> > studying tough linguistic issues that aren't easily represented with kana
> only.
> >
>
> True, it is not destructive, but I stick with my point, why to use a certain
> system, when 120 million native people
> are using another system (and probably more suitable)?
>
> And further, I can't imagine any linguistic issue that can't easily be
> represented with Kana!
> How do Japanese learn these issues than at their schools? In romaji? I don't
> think so...
I agree with Ronald that it makes much more sense for the dictionary
headwords to be in kana. That said, at least one area where I
frequently see romaji employed in Japanese is in the discussion and
analysis of verb conjugation. For example, take "shinu" and write out a
few conjugations in kana and romaji
しなない shinanai
しにます shinimasu
しぬ shinu
しねば shineba
しのう shinou
It is much more obvious from the romaji that the full root of the verb
is "shin" and it is this root that is inflected. If we use only kana,
we have to talk about switching among the different な行 kana, specify
that all the kana should be divided up into two sounds, and that most
linguists agree that the first sound, the 子音, is part of the root but
that the following 母音 are not. Yucky.
Japanese verb conjugations are described in romaji by quite a few books
that I have that are otherwise pretty good about using kana.
--
Curt Fischer
Jim Breen
>Anyway, I do not know anyone who uses paper dictionaries anymore.
I do. Maybe 5-10% as often as electronic ones, but I still use them. I buy
them too. My two most recent purchases were a 1936 reprint of the 1919
4th ed. of the "English-Japanese Dictionary of the Spoken Language", first
compiled by Ernest Satow (a household name in SLJ.) It still has the
original price in pencil: Y17.25 - a lot of money then. The other was
Daniels' 1944 "Dictionary of Japanese (So^sho) Writing Forms.)
>I am
>surprised there is still a market for them.
There sure is.
>The other day I read that Encyc.
>Britannica is selling paper encyclopedias again, and sales are good. I guess
>many people still buy paper reference books. My guess is that most of these
>books will end up on the shelf, seldom used. People who really need
>reference books use battered electronic ones or computer-based versions.
We have the Brit. on our (Windows PC) hard disk, and a 29-vol Funk & Wagnall
on the shelves. F&W wins about 20:1 on frequency of use. (And for digging
out encyclopedic information, Google probably leads F&W by a nose.
Jim Breen
>.... the Dutch East Indies Company claimed
>Japan as a trading colony?
I was with you until that line. History is not your strong point, is it.
>Here's a simple example
>from a common textbook:
>ik/u/ + eru = ikeru
>The romaji is used to explain the root's transformation more easily. This is a
>dumb example, but there are plenty more where that came from, when you're ready
>for them.
I'm waiting for your explanation of the te-form of verbs like yomu
and yobu. Especially the way romaji helps understand them.
Curt Fischer
Jim Breen wrote:
>
> Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>
> >.... the Dutch East Indies Company claimed
> >Japan as a trading colony?
>
> I was with you until that line. History is not your strong point, is it.
>
> >Here's a simple example
> >from a common textbook:
>
> >ik/u/ + eru = ikeru
>
> >The romaji is used to explain the root's transformation more easily. This is a
> >dumb example, but there are plenty more where that came from, when you're ready
> >for them.
>
> I'm waiting for your explanation of the te-form of verbs like yomu
> and yobu. Especially the way romaji helps understand them.
See my post for a clear example where things are clearer in romaji. No,
it doesn't include the te-form. But what you are saying above is only
relevant if you posit that explaining the te-form is easier in kana.
Therefore, I am waiting for your explanation of how explaining the te
form is easier in kana.
--
Curt Fischer
Jim Breen
JB>> I'm waiting for your explanation of the te-form of verbs like yomu
JB>> and yobu. Especially the way romaji helps understand them.
>See my post for a clear example where things are clearer in romaji. No,
>it doesn't include the te-form. But what you are saying above is only
>relevant if you posit that explaining the te-form is easier in kana.
Well, that's your theory about what I wrote.
>Therefore, I am waiting for your explanation of how explaining the te
>form is easier in kana.
Glad to, once you show where I actually made that claim.
Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese verb
inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the traditional
table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just as simple as
romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this point.
My original Japanese course didn't use romaji after week 2. It was only
used for introducing kana; from then on only kana was used. All verb
and adjective inflections were explained in terms of kana and the table
rows. Not a problem, and in no way inferior to the romaji crutch.
Charles Eicher
>
>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>
>>.... the Dutch East Indies Company claimed
>>Japan as a trading colony?
>
>I was with you until that line. History is not your strong point, is it.
Just phrasing it in a way it will get through to our dense Dane. Or perhaps you
are trying to tell
me that the Dutch did NOT try to maintain exclusive control of trade with Japan?
That would be an
even worse mischaracterization.
>>Here's a simple example
>>from a common textbook:
>
>>ik/u/ + eru = ikeru
>
>>The romaji is used to explain the root's transformation more easily. This is a
>>dumb example, but there are plenty more where that came from, when you're ready
>>for them.
>
>I'm waiting for your explanation of the te-form of verbs like yomu
>and yobu. Especially the way romaji helps understand them.
I never said it explained EVERYTHING, just that it was useful in some instances,
as has already
been remarked by others in this thread. And besides, my teacher explained it
with a song, and
made us all sing it repeatedly. I couldn't tell if we were singing in romaji or
kana.
Bart Mathias
> [...] I do not know anyone who uses paper dictionaries anymore. I
> am surprised there is still a market for them. The other day I read
> that Encyc. Britannica is selling paper encyclopedias again, and
> sales are good. I guess many people still buy paper reference
> books. My guess is that most of these books will end up on the
> shelf, seldom used. People who really need reference books use
> battered electronic ones or computer-based versions.
That's one good way to make a guy feel like an old fogey.
I can't imagine using an electronic dictionary.
But maybe there's hope. It occurs to me that I'd probably start
looking for a good web dictionary, rather than buy a new paper
dictionary the next time any of mine wear out, assuming I have decent
Japanese input by then.
Fortunately my Japanese vocabulary is so immense and huge I hardly
ever need to erode my ditionaries anymore.
Bart
Bart Mathias
> [...]
> Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese verb
> inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the traditional
> table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just as simple as
> romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this point.
I can't quite figure out how that works. "(yo)bu" and "(yo)mu" are
both in the "u" row, but neither "ta" nor "da" are. And "nn"
certainly isn't. What am I missing? Senility getting me again?
I've never seen the point to explaining such things to language
learners, who should just be learning them as NS--who generally would
not be able to *explain* them at all--did. Do you tell a cricket
player how to bat in terms of humeri, momentum and leverage? Such
things are for scientists.
But if one were going to explain Japanese conjugation (it was part of
my job, when I had to work for a living--but not in four-skill
classes), one goes one step *farther* from kana, past alphabetic
representation, to (phonetic) feature representation.
And you still can't handle the irregularities.
Bart
Kevin Gowen
> And you still can't handle the irregularities.
That sounds like a geriatric problem. Try eating some husks.
--
Kevin Gowen
Charles Eicher
>Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese verb
>inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the traditional
>table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just as simple as
>romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this point.
Most students are just weaning themselves off romaji at the time basic verb
conjugations are explained. It's usually the last gasp of romaji in the
curriculum.
Jim Breen
>"Jim Breen" writes:
>> Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese verb
>> inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the traditional
>> table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just as simple as
>> romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this point.
>I can't quite figure out how that works. "(yo)bu" and "(yo)mu" are
>both in the "u" row, but neither "ta" nor "da" are. And "nn"
>certainly isn't. What am I missing? Senility getting me again?
I think we have different rotations of the 五十音図. I'm used
to one row starting with あ, the next with か, etc. 呼ぶ is
in the は/ぱ/ば row and 読む in the ま row.
>But if one were going to explain Japanese conjugation (it was part of
>my job, when I had to work for a living--but not in four-skill
>classes), one goes one step *farther* from kana, past alphabetic
>representation, to (phonetic) feature representation.
I agree.
>And you still can't handle the irregularities.
At least it's not Arabic.
Jim Breen
>In article <bctm9o$62p$4...@towncrier.its.monash.edu.au>, Jim says...
>>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>>>.... the Dutch East Indies Company claimed
>>>Japan as a trading colony?
>>I was with you until that line. History is not your strong point, is it.
> Or perhaps you
>are trying to tell
>me that the Dutch did NOT try to maintain exclusive control of
>trade with Japan?
I dare say the Dutch were content to go along with being the sole
Westerners allowed to trade, but that is a LONG LONG way from
"the Dutch East Indies Company claimed Japan as a trading colony". It
was never a colony and the Dutch trade was in no way due to any claims
of the DEIC.
Charles Eicher
>
>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>>In article <bctm9o$62p$4...@towncrier.its.monash.edu.au>, Jim says...
>>>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>>>>.... the Dutch East Indies Company claimed
>>>>Japan as a trading colony?
>
>>>I was with you until that line. History is not your strong point, is it.
>
>> Or perhaps you
>>are trying to tell
>>me that the Dutch did NOT try to maintain exclusive control of
>>trade with Japan?
>
>I dare say the Dutch were content to go along with being the sole
>Westerners allowed to trade, but that is a LONG LONG way from
>"the Dutch East Indies Company claimed Japan as a trading colony". It
>was never a colony and the Dutch trade was in no way due to any claims
>of the DEIC.
Yeah, well, I deliberately overstated the case, but issues of hyperbole aside, I
suppose that's what I
get for cribbing history from websites written by Danes. Apparently they don't
even know their
own history of Imperialism. I guess I stumbled on a revisionist history that
wants to blame the
Dutch empire debacle on DEIC instead of their society as a whole. Some countries
just never get
over losing their empires..
Anyway, I just loved how our daffy Dane blamed American Imperialism for romaji,
when the Danes
were surely using romaji to compile their own dictionaries, long before Dutch
and English
Imperialists colonized America.
Ronald
> Ronald writes:
>
> > All my friends and study mates are non-native Japanese and all speak,
read
> > and write Japanese.
>
> How many friends and study mates do you have? Compare that number to the
> population of Japanese native speakers who study English and might need
J-E,
> E-J dictionaries.
>
I thought you said that only a few of the non-native Japanese, who speak
Japanese, can also read Japanese.
Maybe because I am not native English, I didn't thought you said that there
are more Native Japanese learning english than Americans learning Japanese.
(which is logical of course)
Ronald.
Ronald
> In article <3ef21ce1$0$28900$edd6...@news.versatel.net>, "Ronald" says...
> >
> >"Charles Eicher" <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
> >news:bcsrn...@drn.newsguy.com...
> >> In article <3ef16eec$0$28908$edd6...@news.versatel.net>, "Ronchan"
> >says...
>
> I never heard of any "Yale" system, just Hepburn and kunreishiki. You must
be
> using that horrid, obsolete Jordan book.
> The Kenkyusha uses Hepburn, except with macrons, which most books don't
use
> because it's a pain to typeset. Bravo to Kenkyusha for going to extra
effort to
> use macrons.
I am not using it, but it exists.
>
> >The Japanese already made a logical system
> >for their language, why not use it?
>
> Because kunreshiki sucks, and is not particularly good at expressing the
native
> pronunciation to nonnative speakers. That's why kunreishiki was supplanted
by
> Hepburn. That's why Kenkyusha used Hepburn.
I was reffering to the KANA system of course.
> >It is a product of the period in which
> >"the west" had the arrogance to reform anything the wanted to their own
> >needs.
>
> What, you mean the 15th century, when the Dutch East Indies Company
claimed
> Japan as a trading colony?
You have to re-read your history books for this.
In 1543 the Portugese first arrived in Japan to start up trade with that
country.
In 1570 they recognised Nagasaki, with it's natural harbor as a good place
for their
ships and to start trade. Nagasaki developed into a blooming harbor.
Unfortunately for the portugese they also introduced Christianity in Japan.
This was quite successfull for a period, but the Shogunate (Tokugawa
Iemitsu) saw
christianity and the Jesuits as a thread. In 1637 after a riot supported by
Christians and
Jesuits the shogunate banned the catholic Portugese.
The Dutch were already trading from Hirado for ten years than.
After the Ban on the portugese the Shogunate granted only the Dutch and the
Chinese
as trading partners, because they were only interested in trading and not in
spreading
the "word". Brittain was not even in the picture in Japan.
Japan was never a Dutch trading colony like the East Indies.
The Dutch couldn't leave Deshima (a little artificial island that the
shogunate had
created for trade with foreigners) and were subject to severe laws. Further
they had to visit the Shogunate, at first, every year (2800km!) and later
every 4 years
to show respect and give presents to the Shogunate.
This doesn't really indicate that Japan was a trading colony, now does it!
> >I would like to discuss in an other language with you when you want!
> >And why was the common language English?? Everybody was learning
Japanese,
> >weren't they?
> >Why not use Japanese than? That is the quickest way to learn to speak it
> >quickly!
>
> Yeah right, I'm going to speak Japanese with someone taking their first
week of
> Japanese classes? We had a Japanese-only rule at school, which lasted
about an
> hour.
When I studied in Japan, the most part of the students I was with were
Chinese,
who couldn't speak English very well, or at all.
I had to speak in Japanese with them, because this was the only way to
communicate (because I couldn't speak Chinese)
This meant, using small dictionaries and trying to make short sentences
using those.
We improved in Japanese very quickly.
> >Also much material on Japan and Japanese is widely available in French
and
> >German.
> >A lot of people forget that. There is even a Dutch-Japanese v.v.
Dictionary
> >in the market.
>
> Right, I guess that's why the Dutch students in my overseas classes were
all
> using JE dictionaries.
I also use Kenkyusha, but that is because is has more words in it. The
Dutch-Japanese
is good for first year students, but after that you need a better
dictionary.
By the way, if you want to improve your Japanese further, you'd better use
a Japanese - Japanese dictionary like 新明解国語辞典. I use that since my
third year
and improved my vocabulary immensly!
Above you say it is not very destructive?!?!? I'm lost.
Nevertheless, when a native people are using a system (KANA I mean),
you are implying that a system that a couple of 外人 use is better???
Ok, if you want to.
> >And further, I can't imagine any linguistic issue that can't easily be
> >represented with Kana!
>
> You haven't gotten very far in your studies, I can tell. Here's a simple
example
> from a common textbook:
>
> ik/u/ + eru = ikeru
>
> The romaji is used to explain the root's transformation more easily. This
is a
> dumb example, but there are plenty more where that came from, when you're
ready
> for them.
>
> >How do Japanese learn these issues than at their schools? In romaji? I
don't
> >think so...
>
> You think that Japanese kids are mute until someone teaches them the
language in
> a school? I bet you every Japanese kid knows how to conjugate verbs before
they
> ever enter kindergarten. I bet every US school teaches at least a few bits
of
> their Japanese verb conjugation lessons in romaji.
>
You also have Japanese Grammatical books in Japanese.
They have to explain these same problems, don't they!
By the way it is easier in KANA, because the "root" of the verb is mostly
written in KANJI.
That is the easy part of Japanese if you read a text. Most o the time the
KANJI is the root
of the verb and the HIRAGANA behind it is the transformation...
So you get:
行/く/ + える = 行ける
I don't see the problem...
Ronald.
Ronald
news:3EF254BC...@po.cwru.edu...
>
>
> Ronald wrote:
> >
> > "Charles Eicher" <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
> > news:bcsrn...@drn.newsguy.com...
>
>
> しにます shinimasu
> しぬ shinu
> しねば shineba
> しのう shinou
>
Try writing it in normal Japanese
死なない
死にます
死ぬ
死ねば
死のう
That is easy, you immediately see that 死 is the root and the rest is
transformation!
You can even do
行く
行きます
行って
行った
It even works with the て form or た. How would you do that in Romaji?
I/tte?
I/tta?
Where is the "k" than? Gone?
I/k/tte?
I/k/tta?
Complicated!
Charles Eicher
>
>> >It is a product of the period in which
>> >"the west" had the arrogance to reform anything the wanted to their own
>> >needs.
>>
>> What, you mean the 15th century, when the Dutch East Indies Company
>claimed
>> Japan as a trading colony?
>
>You have to re-read your history books for this.
I did, I just cherry-picked the worst depiction from your OWN countrymen's
history website.
Apparently some people want to atone for their country's history of Cultural
Imperialism and
enslaving a big part of the world. Personally, I think Tokugawa was on the right
track when he
executed all the christians in Japan.
>Above you say it is not very destructive?!?!? I'm lost.
>Nevertheless, when a native people are using a system (KANA I mean),
>you are implying that a system that a couple of 外人 use is better???
>Ok, if you want to.
Pay attention. I said general use of romaji is destructive because prolonged use
is just time wasted
you should be using to practice reading kana. But it isn't destructive when
you're just looking up
one word.
>You also have Japanese Grammatical books in Japanese.
>They have to explain these same problems, don't they!
One of the fundamental issues in Japanese Second Language learners is that JSLs
acquire language
in a different way than native speakers. Just because the Japanese educate their
children in a
certain way, does not mean this is necessarily the best way to teach JSLs.
Curt Fischer
Jim Breen wrote:
>
> Curt Fischer <cr...@po.cwru.edu> dixit:
>
> JB>> I'm waiting for your explanation of the te-form of verbs like yomu
> JB>> and yobu. Especially the way romaji helps understand them.
>
> >See my post for a clear example where things are clearer in romaji. No,
> >it doesn't include the te-form. But what you are saying above is only
> >relevant if you posit that explaining the te-form is easier in kana.
>
> Well, that's your theory about what I wrote.
>
> >Therefore, I am waiting for your explanation of how explaining the te
> >form is easier in kana.
>
> Glad to, once you show where I actually made that claim.
>
> Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese verb
> inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the traditional
> table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just as simple as
> romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this point.
>
> My original Japanese course didn't use romaji after week 2. It was only
> used for introducing kana; from then on only kana was used. All verb
> and adjective inflections were explained in terms of kana and the table
> rows. Not a problem, and in no way inferior to the romaji crutch.
Did anyone ever notice how the b, n, and m keys are right next to each
other on a romaji keyboard? Boom, the ancient problem of Japanese verb
conjugation is solved. Obviously the te form is an example of "lateral
keyboard shift".
Seriously, I believe that while romaji doesn't explain everything about
Japanese verb conjugations, it offers clear advantages over kana.
Without any clear examples of kana out-doing romaji (none have been
offered so far), then the matter of dispute is "does the mere
introduction and use of romaji represent an inconvenience which
outweighs any advantages they might bring?"
It seems we disagree on this point.
--
Curt Fischer
Kevin Wayne Williams
>
> Seriously, I believe that while romaji doesn't explain everything about
> Japanese verb conjugations, it offers clear advantages over kana.
> Without any clear examples of kana out-doing romaji (none have been
> offered so far), then the matter of dispute is "does the mere
> introduction and use of romaji represent an inconvenience which
> outweighs any advantages they might bring?"
I think it also depends on the romaji system in use. I can at least see
your argument for ta-ti-tu-te-to, but it suffers for ta-chi-tsu-te-to.
KWW
Curt Fischer
Ronald wrote:
>
> "Curt Fischer" <cr...@po.cwru.edu> wrote in message
> news:3EF254BC...@po.cwru.edu...
> >
> >
> > Ronald wrote:
> > >
> > > "Charles Eicher" <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
> > > news:bcsrn...@drn.newsguy.com...
> >
> >
> > しなない shinanai
> > しにます shinimasu
> > しぬ shinu
> > しねば shineba
> > しのう shinou
> >
>
> Try writing it in normal Japanese
>
> 死なない
> 死にます
> 死ぬ
> 死ねば
> 死のう
>
> That is easy, you immediately see that 死 is the root and the rest is
> transformation!
The rest is not transformation. Why regard the "n" sound as part of a
transformation when it is in fact present in all of the forms you
listed? An unchanging constant does not a transformation make.
> You can even do
>
> 行く
> 行きます
> 行って
> 行った
>
> It even works with the て form or た. How would you do that in Romaji?
>
> I/tte?
> I/tta?
Yep.
>
> Where is the "k" than? Gone?
>
> I/k/tte?
> I/k/tta?
>
> Complicated!
Yep. Can you name another verb that conjugates like 行く? The
irregularites of this verb are irregular in kana or in romaji. So, what
is your point?
--
Curt Fischer
Ronald
> history website.
> Apparently some people want to atone for their country's history of
Cultural
> Imperialism and
> enslaving a big part of the world. Personally, I think Tokugawa was on the
right
> track when he
> executed all the christians in Japan.
Oh yeah, internet is such a reliable source for historical references!
Try and read a book or two, before you say anything.
Further, the 15h centrury is not the right century because the first foreign
ship reached Japan around 1540 (and the first Dutch ship in 1600), which in
my believe is at least the 16th and 17th century.
Further, your arguments don't seem to add something to the discussion, but
are purely directed to insult people.
> >You also have Japanese Grammatical books in Japanese.
> >They have to explain these same problems, don't they!
>
> One of the fundamental issues in Japanese Second Language learners is that
JSLs
> acquire language
> in a different way than native speakers. Just because the Japanese educate
their
> children in a
> certain way, does not mean this is necessarily the best way to teach JSLs.
>
Ok, why does Kodansha in their Effective Japanese Usage Guide use KANJI and
KANA than?
Probably we never are going to agree on this point.
You keep on using romaji and I will keep on using KANA dictionaries.
And everybody lived happily everafter!
Ronald.
Ronald
>
>
> So, what is your point?
>
YOU said ROMAJI is better, to explain some grammatical issues, but
until now your arguments are not very convincing.
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>Bart Mathias <mat...@hawaii.edu> dixit:
>>"Jim Breen" writes:
>>> Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese verb
>>> inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the traditional
>>> table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just as simple as
>>> romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this point.
>
>>I can't quite figure out how that works. "(yo)bu" and "(yo)mu" are
>>both in the "u" row, but neither "ta" nor "da" are. And "nn"
>>certainly isn't. What am I missing? Senility getting me again?
>
>I think we have different rotations of the 五十音図. I'm used
>to one row starting with あ, the next with か, etc. 呼ぶ is
>in the は/ぱ/ば row and 読む in the ま row.
For Bart, the row starting with "a" is probably "asaki yume mishi".
-Chris
Jed Rothwell
> I do. Maybe 5-10% as often as electronic ones, but I still use them.
I do too, occasionally. Mainly because the biggie version of the KKS is not
in my hand-held gadget. Have they published it in any electronic version? It
was once on line for an outrageous annual fee.
> I buy
> them too. My two most recent purchases were a 1936 reprint of the 1919
> 4th ed. of the "English-Japanese Dictionary of the Spoken Language", first
> compiled by Ernest Satow (a household name in SLJ.) It still has the
> original price in pencil: Y17.25 - a lot of money then.
Neat! I'd buy that. That's a special case. I have some strange &
specialized paper dictionaries, and reference books such as Jack Seward's
"Outrageous Japanese," which is a gem.
Seward reminds me of Michael Cash, come to think of it. Perhaps someday the
Emperor will give Cash the Order of the Sacred Treasure, Third Class. Or
Fifth Class. I'll be there in the peanut gallery.
> We have the Brit. on our (Windows PC) hard disk . . .
So do I. It is disappointing. Slow, and badly organized. I guess I can see
why people prefer the paper version.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> That's one good way to make a guy feel like an old fogey.
That's the idea.
> I can't imagine using an electronic dictionary.
I felt that way when they first came out. They were hard to use, hard to
read, with microscopic screens. You should check out some of the more recent
ones. You might be pleasantly surprised, until you look at the price tag. I
have creaky Seiko TR-9000. The modern versions are slick. See:
For looking up kanji, I have seen nothing to compare with the WWWJDICT
multi-radical method.
- Jed
Ronald
> Bart Mathias writes:
>
> For looking up kanji, I have seen nothing to compare with the WWWJDICT
> multi-radical method.
>
> - Jed
>
Install Japanese Windows or, if you don't want to MS Global IME on an other
language Windows.
Now you'll have the 「IMEパッド」 on which you can draw the kanji with your
mouse.
This is by far the quickest way to look up any kanji!
Than you can just copy-past it into any dictionary.
Look on:
http://hilhorstweb.com/software
for Global IME explanation and download location.
Ronald.
http://ronaldhilhorst.nl
Jed Rothwell
> My original Japanese course didn't use romaji after week 2. It was only
> used for introducing kana; from then on only kana was used. All verb
> and adjective inflections were explained in terms of kana and the table
> rows. Not a problem, and in no way inferior to the romaji crutch.
Honestly, I do not understand this point of view. Why do people think of
romaji as a "crutch"? I have never met anyone who complained he was delayed
because he stuck with them too long. The only time in history Japanese
children were taught romaji extensively for years, delaying the introduction
of kanji, they came out ahead of the normal kanji-educated control groups.
They did better in overall literacy, better in math, history and other
subjects, and better even in kanji after they caught up. So, as far as
anyone knows from actual experiments, kanji retard learning in both native
speakers and foreign learners.
More to the point, romaji are widely used in Japan, so everyone learning the
language should master them. I do not mean only in frivolous uses, such as
in advertising. Scientific and academic papers use romaji extensively in
abstracts, footnotes, bibliographies, references and hyperlinks. Anyone
translating a paper into English will probably need to correctly romanize
author names and titles. Even papers in Japanese will often have romanized
bibliographies. For example, here is one with the journal title "Denki
Kagaku." Lots of papers have long titles in romanization mixed with English
words and abbreviations, such as: "VDT sagyou ni kansuru kentou iinkai
houkoku."
Everyone types in romaji nowadays, too.
You cannot simply forget about romaji after two weeks of studying Japanese.
If you are going to do any serious translating, you will need to deal with
it often. Of course, it is not difficult to keep up proficiency in romaji.
But there are issues that take longer than two weeks to master. At least,
they took me longer. You have to be aware of the different schemes (Hepburn,
kunreishiki etc.), and you have to conform to the rules your editor or
publisher sets.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> enslaving a big part of the world. Personally, I think Tokugawa was on the
right
> track when he executed all the christians in Japan.
Har, har. And I thought I was contrarian. Personally, I thought it was a big
mistake not to hang the Emp. after WWII, especially after I read the Bix
book -- a real downer.
> Pay attention. I said general use of romaji is destructive because
prolonged use
> is just time wasted
> you should be using to practice reading kana.
Pay attention: Everyone who does scientific, technical or legal translations
has to know how to read and write romanized Japanese for footnotes,
abstracts, author names, etc. It does take a little practice. Also, you
gotta know how to type in romaji.
> But it isn't destructive when
> you're just looking up
> one word.
It isn't ever destructive. Why should it be? If we could convert every
document we need into romanization automatically, it would not make the
slightest difference.
> One of the fundamental issues in Japanese Second Language learners is that
JSLs
> acquire language
> in a different way than native speakers. Just because the Japanese educate
their
> children in a certain way, does not mean this is necessarily the best way
to teach JSLs.
Amen to that.
- Jed
Kevin Gowen
> Neat! I'd buy that. That's a special case. I have some strange &
> specialized paper dictionaries, and reference books such as Jack
> Seward's "Outrageous Japanese," which is a gem.
>
> Seward reminds me of Michael Cash, come to think of it. Perhaps
> someday the Emperor will give Cash the Order of the Sacred Treasure,
> Third Class. Or Fifth Class. I'll be there in the peanut gallery.
I have never liked Jack Seward. I found at least one part of one of his
books to be borderline racist, and he generally writes about how many
Japanese women he screwed and how he is the only westerner in the history of
the planet to be able to speak Japanese with fluency.
--
Kevin Gowen
Kevin Gowen
> For looking up kanji, I have seen nothing to compare with the WWWJDICT
> multi-radical method.
I had no idea that the multiradical method was unique to WWWJDICT.
http://www.casio.co.jp/exword/product/product/xd_v9000/detail_4.html
--
Kevin Gowen
Chris Kern
<jedro...@mindspring.com> posted the following:
>Jim Breen writes:
>
>> My original Japanese course didn't use romaji after week 2. It was only
>> used for introducing kana; from then on only kana was used. All verb
>> and adjective inflections were explained in terms of kana and the table
>> rows. Not a problem, and in no way inferior to the romaji crutch.
>
>Honestly, I do not understand this point of view. Why do people think of
>romaji as a "crutch"? I have never met anyone who complained he was delayed
>because he stuck with them too long.
In fact I can provide a personal counterexample for this claim -- our
class used the Jorden texts and did not learn even kana until the
second semester (over 4 months of classes). I was not crippled by the
long-term exposure to romaji, however, I can read and write kana now
with absolutely no problems.
-Chris
Paul Blay
>
> I have never liked Jack Seward. I found at least one part of one of his
> books to be borderline racist, and he generally writes about how many
> Japanese women he screwed and how he is the only westerner in the history of
> the planet to be able to speak Japanese with fluency.
Thus setting the standard for JET students ...
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>
>
>Ronald wrote:
>> Where is the "k" than? Gone?
>>
>> I/k/tte?
>> I/k/tta?
>>
>> Complicated!
>
>Yep. Can you name another verb that conjugates like 行く? The
>irregularites of this verb are irregular in kana or in romaji. So, what
>is your point?
It's too bad that the verb conjugates like that because you have to
rely on context to know how to read 行って when you see it (it's
usually not that hard since okonau and iku have totally different
meanings, but still...)
-Chris
Kevin Gowen
IME JETs who claim to speak Japanese with fluency or even moderate
proficiency are pretty rare. (excluding the CIRs, of course) If you ever
want to see some fun, watch a gathering of CIRs at some meeting:
"Watch me write "hamburger" in kanji"
"Dig my passive causative rentaikei with a twist"
"I know the Emperor's last name"
--
Kevin Gowen
Charles Eicher
>
>Further, your arguments don't seem to add something to the discussion, but
>are purely directed to insult people.
Pot. Kettle. Black. If you don't want to be insulted, I suggest you do not
attempt to support your
weak arguments by throwing around casual accusations of Cultural Imperialism,
when your OWN
history is one of the worst examples.
>Ok, why does Kodansha in their Effective Japanese Usage Guide use KANJI and
>KANA than?
OK, why does Kodansha publish that book in TWO editions, one with romaji and one
without?
Charles Eicher
I think the implications of a crutch is that you should stop using them when
you're able to walk on
your own two feet. You might need them in the future if you have trouble
walking, but they
certainly shouldn't be used as a first resort.
Don Kirkman
<bcuv8...@drn.newsguy.com>:
>In article <3ef2bfec$0$28898$edd6...@news.versatel.net>, "Ronald" says...
>>> >It is a product of the period in which
>>> >"the west" had the arrogance to reform anything the wanted to their own
>>> >needs.
>>You have to re-read your history books for this.
>I did, I just cherry-picked the worst depiction from your OWN countrymen's
>history website.
>Apparently some people want to atone for their country's history of Cultural
>Imperialism and
>enslaving a big part of the world. Personally, I think Tokugawa was on the right
>track when he
>executed all the christians in Japan.
Actually, that probably didn't quite happen, though that appears to have
been the intent of Tokugawa decrees. ISTM sometime in the past I've
read persuasive writings indicating that numbers of Christians,
especially in Kyushu, had altar pieces with Buddhist imagery showing but
with Christian imagery on the reverse, for use in their private, secret
devotions.
[...]
--
Don
don...@covad.net
David Chien
For years, before seriously starting Japanese lessons last year, I
was picking up pieces of Japanese from Dramas, Anime, etc. just as a fun
hobby rather than anything serious. Yet, during all this time, it was
either by listening and repeating, or by getting it into romanji that I
was able to pickup a nice number of Japanese words without actually
studying at all.
Although I've picked up kana now, it's still slower reading it than
romanji due to my longer experience using English. (and slower than
reading Kanji, too!, due to my knowing Chinese already)
So while romanji should eventually be pushed aside for kana/kanji as
one progresses, there was that transitional period where reading kana
was slower than ice melting, and it was simply faster and better to read
it in romanji to get the homework done.
But, in less than 6 months, kana kicked in and now it's not a
problem reading it pretty quick in all sorts of texts.
And, thanks to romanji, learning Japanese has been pretty easy due
to the vast bank of works already learned through romanji earlier. No
need to cover the basics like 'what is watashi?' 'what is boku?' etc.,
but rather, jumping right into sentences.
Like anything else, it all depends on how fast you pickup kana and
can memorize and read it fast. Didn't hurt here.
Kevin Gowen
> Same here!
>
> For years, before seriously starting Japanese lessons last year, I
> was picking up pieces of Japanese from Dramas, Anime, etc. just as a
> fun hobby rather than anything serious. Yet, during all this time,
> it was either by listening and repeating, or by getting it into
> romanji that I was able to pickup a nice number of Japanese words
> without actually studying at all.
>
> Although I've picked up kana now, it's still slower reading it
> than romanji due to my longer experience using English. (and slower
> than reading Kanji, too!, due to my knowing Chinese already)
Knowing Chinese won't help you read Japanese. Hope this helps!
--
Kevin Gowen
Jed Rothwell
> I have never liked Jack Seward. I found at least one part of one of his
> books to be borderline racist . . .
I wouldn't say borderline. He is overtly racist, and also a right wing
extremist when it comes to politics and things like U.S. immigration policy.
Personally I suppose I would find him revolting in many ways. But he is
smart, and funny, and his feel for language is marvelous. You have to take
the good with the bad.
> . . . and he generally writes about how many
> Japanese women he screwed . . .
Yes. He reminds me of Henry Miller.
> . . . and how he is the only westerner in the history of
> the planet to be able to speak Japanese with fluency.
He is right that there are not many.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> > For looking up kanji, I have seen nothing to compare with the WWWJDICT
> > multi-radical method.
>
> I had no idea that the multiradical method was unique to WWWJDICT.
Maybe it isn't. I am not familliar with other products. Anyway, it is well
implemented in WWWJDICT, and way better than any previous method I have
seen. The method recommended by Ronald sounds interesting, but I cannot use
it.
- Jed
Charles Eicher
says...
>
>Kevin Gowen writes:
>
>> > For looking up kanji, I have seen nothing to compare with the WWWJDICT
>> > multi-radical method.
>>
>> I had no idea that the multiradical method was unique to WWWJDICT.
>
>Maybe it isn't.
It isn't. It's in UniDict and the Zaurus. They work great.
Jed Rothwell
> >Honestly, I do not understand this point of view. Why do people think of
> >romaji as a "crutch"? I have never met anyone who complained he was
delayed
> >because he stuck with them too long.
>
> In fact I can provide a personal counterexample for this claim -- our
> class used the Jorden texts and did not learn even kana until the
> second semester (over 4 months of classes). I was not crippled by the
> long-term exposure to romaji, however, I can read and write kana now
> with absolutely no problems.
I used Jorden texts too, taught by Jorden herself. As I am sure you realize,
she felt that you would make more rapid and comfortable progress without
kana and kanji at first. By doing things in the right order you save time
overall, and come out ahead, just as Japanese children did when they were
taught romaji first for several years. When they were introduced to kanji
they quickly caught up with and surpassed normal students.
Jorden would never say you can learn Japanese without ever learning kanji.
(Unless you happened to be blind and you would be limited to Braille text
anyway.) With the technology available circa 1980 that would have been
absurd. The only way for sighted people in 1980 to gain useful, practical
skills in Japanese was to take on kanji. However, I think technology has
changed marvelously since then. If I were starting out now, I would never
bother to learn more than a few hundred kanji: enough to read railroad
station notices and comic books. I am amazed by the automatic parsing and
kanji identification functions in WWWJDICT and other programs. Already, for
many serious academic or professional purposes, they have made knowledge of
kanji nugatory. In a few years I expect they they will make kanji about as
relevant to the technical translator as the ability to write with a brush or
use a soroban.
I personally have no reason to read Japanese text which is not available to
me in e-text. Maybe if I were studying ancient handwritten documents or
1930s newspapers I would, but everything I deal with was written lately on
computers, and it all comes to me in electronic format. (Thank goodness fax
machine have gone out of style!) I dump the text straight into WWWJDICT and
gloss everything. Soon I will be able to convert it to romaji, and then I
will simply chuck kanji dictionaries and whatnot forever. Why bother with
that stuff? This is not something that will happen in the distant future. It
is happening now; the transition is almost complete. The use of all romaji
text in that case will not a "crutch" in any sense, because it will not
limit the range of text I can access, or speed, or comprehension. A tool
that is always available, reliable and transparent is not a "crutch." It is
more like a pair of eyeglasses. It does not impede your performance by
slowing you down or interfering with performance. Once all the text I want
is available in romaji, it will be as good as kanji. It will be better for
people who have not yet taken the trouble to learn kanji. They can skip the
whole business and get on with mastering the language instead. Once you
understand the 7:00 news or a movie, as I think most people do after a few
years of intensive study, you will be able to read as fluently as English or
any other alphabetic language. You will make more rapid progress, because
wide exposure and speed are the keys to mastering a language. It is better
to breeze through a dozen novels (or technical papers, Nikkei Shimbun, or
whatever floats your boat) in romaji in one month than it is to struggle
through one novel in kanji.
For people who have an aversion to romaji, there are already tools for
children that convert e-text into primary school level kana and a few
hundred kanji, which anyone can read fluently after a year or so of studying
Japanese. Personally, I prefer romaji because it has spaces.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> Knowing Chinese won't help you read Japanese. Hope this helps!
That can't be true. Some of the Chinese people I studied with were way ahead
of me, because they knew the kanji already, albeit with somewhat different
meanings. I know an old Chinese woman educated in pre-war Taiwan who writes
better Japanese than most Japanese people do. Better handwriting *and*
style.
I do not know a word of Chinese, but I was amazed how well I could get
around Beijing knowing Japanese. After a few minor adjustments you can
easily find your way around a college campus with the maps and street signs
in Chinese. Buildings marked "Physics Department" or "Post Office" are
exactly the same. "Emergency exit" is the same. A sign saying, "student
union grocery store 500 meters that way," could almost be in Japanese.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> >> I had no idea that the multiradical method was unique to WWWJDICT.
> >
> >Maybe it isn't.
>
> It isn't. It's in UniDict and the Zaurus. They work great.
Zaurus -es (Zauri?) look kinda neat. I have never used one. They may a
little small for me. This creaky old Seiko TR9000 has a nice big keyboard,
6" diag.
Still, you can't beat the price of the WWWJDICT! It's got a big screen, too.
21" in my case.
I have never needed a mobile dictionary, because I seldom travel. These
Zauru-es-es must be handy for travel.
A friend who works in Japanese high tech tells me that several companies are
about to come out with low power high res electronic paper for handheld
gadgets. He tells me to wait a few years before upgrading the TR9000. There
was something about that in Sci. Am.
- Jed
Jim Breen
No, it's not unique, although it was probably the first WWW server to do
it, and maybe still the only one.
Multi-radical lookup was an idea around for years that was waiting
for the technology to be suitable. Mark Spahn mentioned he sort-of
implemented it years ago using letter codes because he had no
kanji-capable computers.
AFAIK the first time it really saw a working implementation was in JWP
about 10 years ago. I added it to xjdic not long after that, in a clunky
fashion, and WWWJDIC's code is a rework of the xjdic. Now any electronic
dictionary worth its salt has it.
I'm far from happy with the WWWJDIC interface - it would be great if I
could get it into a set of button-tops - but I am loath to go into the
heavy client-side scripting that would require.
--
Jim Breen (j.breen(a)csse.monash.edu.au http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/)
Computer Science & Software Engineering, Tel: +61 3 9905 3298
Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia Fax: +61 3 9905 5146
(Monash Provider No. 00008C) ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学
Jim Breen
>Jim Breen writes:
>> My original Japanese course didn't use romaji after week 2. It was only
>> used for introducing kana; from then on only kana was used. All verb
>> and adjective inflections were explained in terms of kana and the table
>> rows. Not a problem, and in no way inferior to the romaji crutch.
>Honestly, I do not understand this point of view. Why do people think of
>romaji as a "crutch"?
Have I managed to trigger an outbreak of the Holy Romanization War[1]? Is
Jed Rothsfeld on the track of Weapons of Mass Distraction?
>I have never met anyone who complained he was delayed
>because he stuck with them too long.
I have. Moreover I know many Japanese language instructors who complain that
their students are delayed by excessive reliance on romaji.
1. Actually it can't the *real* Holy Romanization War, as that wasn't
kana vs romaji; it was Hepburn vs kunreisiki.
Jim Breen
>... but the Shogunate (Tokugawa
>Iemitsu) saw christianity and the Jesuits as a thread.
Bloody hell! Was Iemitsu using newsgroups even then. That was before
Al Gore invented the Internet.
Jim Breen
> Brittain was not even in the picture in Japan.
And not totally out of it, either. In the Tower of London there is a
suit of armour which was a gift to James I in 1613.
Kevin Gowen
> Kevin Gowen writes:
>
>> I have never liked Jack Seward. I found at least one part of one of
>> his books to be borderline racist . . .
>
> I wouldn't say borderline. He is overtly racist, and also a right wing
> extremist when it comes to politics and things like U.S. immigration
> policy.
I've only skimmed the one book of his. The passage I had in mind was when he
was writing about the crime rate in a certain major American city as opposed
to a Japanese city, and he felt it relevant to mention that the American
city's population was over 50% black.
> Personally I suppose I would find him revolting in many ways.
> But he is smart, and funny, and his feel for language is marvelous.
> You have to take the good with the bad.
No, I don't.
>> . . . and he generally writes about how many
>> Japanese women he screwed . . .
>
> Yes. He reminds me of Henry Miller.
>
>
>> . . . and how he is the only westerner in the history of
>> the planet to be able to speak Japanese with fluency.
>
> He is right that there are not many.
I don't know that he is.
--
Kevin Gowen
Kevin Gowen
> Kevin Gowen writes:
>
>>> For looking up kanji, I have seen nothing to compare with the
>>> WWWJDICT multi-radical method.
>>
>> I had no idea that the multiradical method was unique to WWWJDICT.
>
> Maybe it isn't. I am not familliar with other products.
> Anyway, it is
> well implemented in WWWJDICT, and way better than any previous method
> I have seen. The method recommended by Ronald sounds interesting, but
> I cannot use it.
>
> - Jed
--
Kevin Gowen
Kevin Gowen
> Kevin Gowen writes:
>
>> Knowing Chinese won't help you read Japanese. Hope this helps!
>
> That can't be true.
Not only can it be true, it is!
> Some of the Chinese people I studied with were
> way ahead of me, because they knew the kanji already, albeit with
> somewhat different meanings.
Could it be that they were just more clever than you?
> I know an old Chinese woman educated in
> pre-war Taiwan who writes better Japanese than most Japanese people
> do. Better handwriting *and* style.
This is a nice anecdote that tells us nothing.
> I do not know a word of Chinese, but I was amazed how well I could get
> around Beijing knowing Japanese. After a few minor adjustments you can
> easily find your way around a college campus with the maps and street
> signs in Chinese. Buildings marked "Physics Department" or "Post
> Office" are exactly the same. "Emergency exit" is the same. A sign
> saying, "student union grocery store 500 meters that way," could
> almost be in Japanese.
Did you ever find a store that sold letters?
--
Kevin Gowen
Charles Eicher
>
>Jed Rothwell <jedro...@mindspring.com> dixit:
>>Jim Breen writes:
>>> My original Japanese course didn't use romaji after week 2. It was only
>>> used for introducing kana; from then on only kana was used. All verb
>>> and adjective inflections were explained in terms of kana and the table
>>> rows. Not a problem, and in no way inferior to the romaji crutch.
>
>>Honestly, I do not understand this point of view. Why do people think of
>>romaji as a "crutch"?
>
>Have I managed to trigger an outbreak of the Holy Romanization War[1]? Is
>Jed Rothsfeld on the track of Weapons of Mass Distraction?
Parva leves capiunt animas.
>>I have never met anyone who complained he was delayed
>>because he stuck with them too long.
>
>I have. Moreover I know many Japanese language instructors who complain that
>their students are delayed by excessive reliance on romaji.
>
>1. Actually it can't the *real* Holy Romanization War, as that wasn't
>kana vs romaji; it was Hepburn vs kunreisiki.
Verba volant, scripta manet.
Bart Mathias
> Bart Mathias <mat...@hawaii.edu> dixit:
> >"Jim Breen" writes:
> >> Neither romaji nor kana are fantastic for explaining Japanese
> >> verb inflections, but if you think of kana in terms of the
> >> traditional table, and do the inflection off the row, it is just
> >> as simple as romaji and avoids introducing romaji just for this
> >> point.
> >I can't quite figure out how that works. "(yo)bu" and "(yo)mu"
> >are both in the "u" row, but neither "ta" nor "da" are. And "nn"
> >>certainly isn't. What am I missing? Senility getting me again?
> I think we have different rotations of the [gojuuonzu]. I'm used to
> one row starting with [a], the next with [ka], etc. [yobu] is in
> the [ha/pa/ba] row and [yomu] in the [ma] row.
Oh! Oh my goodness!! You must get awful cricks in your neck.
When you speak Japanese, do you say "ha-retsu" and "u-gyoo"? (No
offense; this is only meant sarcastically.)
But I think I see my senility attack now. When you spoke of
explaining the conjugation of "yomu" and "yobu," I jumped to the
hasty conclusion that you were alluding to the "...nda/...nde" parts.
The "ba, bi, bu, be, bo" parts work just fine in...erh, rows.
Bart
Jim Breen
>Parva leves capiunt animas.
[snip]
>Verba volant, scripta manet.
Quidquid praecipies, esto brevis.
Travers Naran
> Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>
>
>>Parva leves capiunt animas.
>
>
> [snip]
>
>
>>Verba volant, scripta manet.
>
> Quidquid praecipies, esto brevis.
Je ne parle pas le latin, mais je pense que je comprend ceci.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Travers Naran | Visit the SFTV Science Blunders
F/T Programmer,P/T Meddler In Time&Space | Hall of Infamy!
New Westminster, British Columbia, |
Canada, Earth, Milky Way, etc. | <www.geocities.com/naran500/>
"Stand Back! I'm a programmer!" | ** UPDATED 9-Apr-2002 **
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bart Mathias
> "Curt Fischer" <cr...@po.cwru.edu> wrote in message
> news:3EF31174...@po.cwru.edu...
> > So, what is your point?
> YOU said ROMAJI is better, to explain some grammatical issues, but
> until now your arguments are not very convincing.
I think that Curt figured you would be able to see his point, so he
didn't rudely spell it out for you. I'm more gyoogiga warui, so I'll
spell it out.
If you do "shi-nanai, shi-nu," etc., then you have "-nanai" as the
negative ending. By the time you have looked at all the verbs, you
have quite a batch of negatives: "-kanai, -ganai, -sanai, -tanai,
-nanai, -banai, -manai, -ranai, -wanai" and "-nai." (You also get a
set like "-ku, -gu," etc., for non-past forms, "-ki, -gi," etc., for
"-masu" and "-nagara" attaching, etc., etc.)
You have a root meaning "die": "shi-." You have a root meaning
"spread": "shi-." You have a root meaning "pierce to the quick"
(yes, it's rare): "shi-." You have a root meaning "find out; know":
"shi-." Then you have to know that negating "shi-" requires "-nanai"
if it means "die," "-kanai" if it means "spread," etc.
Japanese dictionaries tell you briefly which sets of endings verbs
take. Fortunately all the verbs that go "-manai" also go "-mi,"
"-meba," "me," etc., and as Jim points out these are in the same
kana-chart columns, so they just say "ma-column, five-step," etc.
But this works only because the kana charts are based on a
consonant-vowel analysis (golly, kind of like romaji!).
But of course then they are technically obligated to explain what
endings a "ma-column, five-step" verb has, what a "ra-column,
five-step" verb has, etc. Not to mention "ma-column, lower-one-step"
verbs, etc. Look in the back of your Japanese dictionary and see how
much space this takes.
With romaji you ccan make the same fundamental analysis explicit, and
say you have roots "shin-" for "die," "shik-" for "spread," "shir-"
for "know," etc., and just one "-(a)na-(-i/-ku/-katta/...) for
negation, with the rule that you keep the "a" if it attaches to a
consonant, discard it if it goes on a vowel. That takes hardly any
ink at all.
It comes down to what linguists call "aesthetics."
Bart
Charles Eicher
>
>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>
>>Parva leves capiunt animas.
>
>[snip]
>
>>Verba volant, scripta manet.
>
>Quidquid praecipies, esto brevis.
Dictum sapienti sat est.
Hirofumi Nagamura
> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Charles Eicher wrote in article
> <bcuv8...@drn.newsguy.com>:
>
>>track when he
>>executed all the christians in Japan.
>
> Actually, that probably didn't quite happen, though that appears to have
> been the intent of Tokugawa decrees. ISTM sometime in the past I've
> read persuasive writings indicating that numbers of Christians,
> especially in Kyushu, had altar pieces with Buddhist imagery showing but
> with Christian imagery on the reverse, for use in their private, secret
> devotions.
Ah, the "kakure kirishitan". Even with their descendants included,
Christians today make up less than 1% of Japan's population, so the
Tokugawas probably came awfully close to success.
Cheers,
--
Hirofumi Nagamura
Kobe, Japan
Charles Eicher
>
>Jim Breen wrote:
>> Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> dixit:
>>
>>
>>>Parva leves capiunt animas.
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>>>Verba volant, scripta manet.
>>
>> Quidquid praecipies, esto brevis.
>
>Je ne parle pas le latin, mais je pense que je comprend ceci.
>
Qui invenit Google, invenit thesaurum.
(no, that doesn't mean what you think it does).
Charles Eicher
>
>Don Kirkman wrote:
>> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Charles Eicher wrote in article
>> <bcuv8...@drn.newsguy.com>:
>>
>>>Personally, I think Tokugawa was on the right
>>>track when he
>>>executed all the christians in Japan.
>>
>> Actually, that probably didn't quite happen, though that appears to have
>> been the intent of Tokugawa decrees. ISTM sometime in the past I've
>> read persuasive writings indicating that numbers of Christians,
>> especially in Kyushu, had altar pieces with Buddhist imagery showing but
>> with Christian imagery on the reverse, for use in their private, secret
>> devotions.
I've seen pictures of antique lacquerware altarpieces constructed in Japan for
the Jesuits, they look like they were built in a butsudan shop. But these items
definitely did not conceal their purpose or christian iconography.
>Ah, the "kakure kirishitan". Even with their descendants included,
>Christians today make up less than 1% of Japan's population, so the
>Tokugawas probably came awfully close to success.
I think it was more Truman's fault. The Nagasaki A-bomb missed the target and
landed over a ridge of low mountains, shielding the city from the main blast. It
landed right on top of an enforced ghetto of slave laborers, including all the
Japanese christians that they could round up. The bomb probably killed more
Japanese christians than Tokugawa. Oh the irony.
Ross Klatte
>Date: 2003-06-21 02:34 Eastern Daylight Time
>Christians today make up less than 1% of Japan's population,
Christians today make up less than 1% of the Christian population, too.
Ross
http://community.webshots.com/user/ross_klatte
http://www.panawave.gr.jp
Michael Cash
belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>In article <bcklo1$k28f0$1...@ID-105084.news.dfncis.de>, "Kevin says...
>
>>
>>Where are you going to be placed? I suspect you should have heard by now.
>
>Tochigi-shi, tochigi-ken.
Dude! I deliver tsukemono there!
So, tell me, have you ever lived in the God-forsaken boondocks before?
Or will this be your first time?
--
Michael Cash
"There was a time, Mr. Cash, when I believed you must be the most useless
thing in the world. But that was before I read a Microsoft help file."
Prof. Ernest T. Bass
Mount Pilot College
Kevin Gowen
> I think it was more Truman's fault. The Nagasaki A-bomb missed the
> target and landed over a ridge of low mountains, shielding the city
> from the main blast. It landed right on top of an enforced ghetto of
> slave laborers, including all the Japanese christians that they could
> round up. The bomb probably killed more Japanese christians than
> Tokugawa. Oh the irony.
Why is that ironic? You'll understand that being American, I have trouble
with irony, so I graciously request your indulgence.
--
Kevin Gowen
Chris Kern
<mike...@sunfield.ne.jp> posted the following:
>On 16 Jun 2003 13:32:34 -0700, Chris Kern <Chris_...@newsguy.com>
>belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>
>>In article <bcklo1$k28f0$1...@ID-105084.news.dfncis.de>, "Kevin says...
>>
>>>
>>>Where are you going to be placed? I suspect you should have heard by now.
>>
>>Tochigi-shi, tochigi-ken.
>
>Dude! I deliver tsukemono there!
>
>So, tell me, have you ever lived in the God-forsaken boondocks before?
>Or will this be your first time?
It doesn't really sound like god-forsaken boondocks to me.
Tochigi-shi is 84,000 people and is an hour away from Tokyo (asakusa,
at least) by train.
I went to college in Iowa, in a town called Grinnell which had less
than 6,000 people. The largest city in Iowa which was an hour away
from Grinnell is 200,000. So yes, I've lived in boondocks (or
something like it).
-Chris
Chris Kern
<jedro...@mindspring.com> posted the following:
>Still, you can't beat the price of the WWWJDICT! It's got a big screen, too.
>21" in my case.
The problem with EDICT/WWWJDICT is that they are more glossaries than
dictionaries. If you get the Kenkyusha, when you look up a word you
get a bunch of usage examples, including idiomatic usages (which may
be what you are looking for). Sometimes a glossary is all you need,
and I use EDICT frequently, but I sometimes find myself going to the
goo.ne.jp dictionary if I'm not quite sure what a word means from the
gloss.
-Chris
Kevin Wayne Williams
>
> I went to college in Iowa, in a town called Grinnell which had less
> than 6,000 people. The largest city in Iowa which was an hour away
> from Grinnell is 200,000. So yes, I've lived in boondocks (or
> something like it).
My wife is from Canby, just south of Adair. Population 6 now that she
and her sisters have moved away.
KWW
Michael Cash
belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 20:58:00 +0900, Michael Cash
><mike...@sunfield.ne.jp> posted the following:
>
>>On 16 Jun 2003 13:32:34 -0700, Chris Kern <Chris_...@newsguy.com>
>>belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>>
>>>In article <bcklo1$k28f0$1...@ID-105084.news.dfncis.de>, "Kevin says...
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you going to be placed? I suspect you should have heard by now.
>>>
>>>Tochigi-shi, tochigi-ken.
>>
>>Dude! I deliver tsukemono there!
>>
>>So, tell me, have you ever lived in the God-forsaken boondocks before?
>>Or will this be your first time?
>
>It doesn't really sound like god-forsaken boondocks to me.
Alright, so I had no business speaking for God. But it *is* the
boonies.
>Tochigi-shi is 84,000 people and is an hour away from Tokyo (asakusa,
>at least) by train.
Trust me. Boooooo Kneeeeeees.
And, for all the practical good it will do you on a daily basis, Tokyo
may as well be on the dark side of the moon. Of course, when you *are*
able to take the time to go down, it is very conveniently located.
You're also not terribly far from Kiryu and a beer. Assuming you are
of legal drinking age, of course. I have no interest in corrupting a
minor.
>
>I went to college in Iowa, in a town called Grinnell which had less
>than 6,000 people. The largest city in Iowa which was an hour away
>from Grinnell is 200,000. So yes, I've lived in boondocks (or
>something like it).
Then you still have some shoes with pig shit encrusted on the soles,
no doubt. Fetch them along; people in Tochigi will mistake you for a
native.
Jed Rothwell
> The problem with EDICT/WWWJDICT is that they are more glossaries than
> dictionaries. If you get the Kenkyusha, when you look up a word you
> get a bunch of usage examples . . .
Good point. I was thinking of the kanji lookup gadgets like the Canon
Wordtank. Are you saying the Zaurus does a kanji lookup and then takes you
to the Kenkyusha? That's impressive. With these older hand-held gadgets I
have to find the kanji first and then enter the reading into the Seiko
TR-9000. Fortunately, in most cases I know how to read the kanji anyway. In
fact, I usually know the word too, but I can't think of a spot-on English
equivalent. I sometimes use an English thesaurus for that problem.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> Multi-radical lookup was an idea around for years that was waiting
> for the technology to be suitable. Mark Spahn mentioned he sort-of
> implemented it years ago . . .
Yes. For that matter I think the old Nelson dictionary allowed you to look
up "unofficial" radicals. Traditionalists frowned on it.
> Now any electronic
> dictionary worth its salt has it.
Including the full dictionaries with the Kenkyusha? I am behind the times
with my TR-9000 dinosaur.
> I'm far from happy with the WWWJDIC interface - it would be great if I
> could get it into a set of button-tops - but I am loath to go into the
> heavy client-side scripting that would require.
I am not sure what "button-tops" means, but I think your interface is great.
If you do fiddle with it, please to keep it friendly to people with minor
disabilities and poor motor control. If you would like to see an example of
the worst possible interface, look at Windows XT Start Button menus,
especially the "up and over" ones. I mean the menus that pop up on the
right, and expect you to move over staying exactly within the line, and then
move down the menu. If you miss slightly while moving to the right the menu
vanishes like a soap bubble.
I am sure you know the following, but for programmers who do not, here are a
few pointers. The keys to programming for disabilities are: sit still; wait
for the user input; spread the targets apart; make the target areas large;
indicate when a target is under the cursor (but not selected yet); show a
clear marker when the target is selected; and finally, let the user adjust
the screen size. WWWJDICT does all of the above. For example, it responds
correctly to the Internet Explorer Text Size command, something many web
pages fail to do. That's important for people with poor vision as well as
people with motor control problems.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> >> Knowing Chinese won't help you read Japanese. Hope this helps!
> >
> > That can't be true.
>
> Not only can it be true, it is!
No t'isn't.
> > Some of the Chinese people I studied with were
> > way ahead of me, because they knew the kanji already, albeit with
> > somewhat different meanings.
>
> Could it be that they were just more clever than you?
Perhaps they were, but they also had a much easier time than the other
people I was studying with, and some of those other people were linguistics
grad students who spoke three or four European languages. Also, I have met
and read about a number of Chinese immigrants in Japan who master the
written language much faster than other foreign students.
How could that not be the case? They can skip memorizing thousands of kanji
and jukugo, which are the same in Japanese or very similar.
Are you suggesting that a person who speaks a language similar to another,
with many words in common, has more difficulty learning because of minor
differences in meaning? Do you think that people who speak Spanish have more
trouble learning French than, say, Turkish or Korean?
> > saying, "student union grocery store 500 meters that way," could
> > almost be in Japanese.
>
> Did you ever find a store that sold letters?
Yes, as well as toilet paper. I am aware of the interference between Chinese
and Japanese. It is no worse than the interference caused by differences
between English and Japanese, such as "yes" meaning "no."
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> >Honestly, I do not understand this point of view. Why do people think of
> >romaji as a "crutch"?
>
> Have I managed to trigger an outbreak of the Holy Romanization War[1]? Is
> Jed Rothsfeld on the track of Weapons of Mass Distraction?
No, you have not, but you have done a fine job of evading the issue I
raised, which is that romaji is widely used in academic translation, so
people should learn how to use it. It should not be dropped from the course
after a week or two and forgotten. People do not learn it. I have often
found mistakes in romanized author names, titles and whatnot, especially
things such as the name Kenitirou versus Ken'itirou.
> 1. Actually it can't the *real* Holy Romanization War, as that wasn't
> kana vs romaji; it was Hepburn vs kunreisiki.
As I pointed out, both of those have to be taught, along with the other
variations. A person who does serious translations may prefer Hepburn or
kunreisiki, but he has to know both and practice using both, because
different journals have different rules.
- Jed
Jed Rothwell
> Ah, the "kakure kirishitan". Even with their descendants included,
> Christians today make up less than 1% of Japan's population, so the
> Tokugawas probably came awfully close to success.
What percent of the Japan's population were the Christians before the
Tokugawa persecution began?
- Jed