What exactly does "usu" mean? ^v^
James Goldman
could be "wusu" or something similar. It sounds something like "wuss",
and we say it all the time. It means something between "yes, Sensei", "I
understand" and "gimme your best shot!".
But, if anyone knows, what *exactly* does it mean and how is it spelt,
please? I assume I'm not calling Sensei a wuss, or I'd know about it :)
James
PC Jensen
Go http://www.amaks.com and search the archive for "ossu" and "osu". I
think the latest thread on the subject was sometime last Fall.
Another indispensable source of course is:
http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/shotokan_faq/terms.html
--
PC
aka "Kitaku"
http://inet.uni2.dk/home/pc
* *
James Goldman
>
> Go http://www.amaks.com and search the archive for "ossu" and "osu". I
> think the latest thread on the subject was sometime last Fall.
>
> Another indispensable source of course is:
> http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/shotokan_faq/terms.html
Thank you. I read as much of the thread as came up, and the general
consensus seems to have been that "ossu" is vulgar and unnecessarily
macho. I quote :
"The shortest definition of osu: 'Yo! Whassup wid you!'"
Why do we say this in a respectable dojo (incidentally, mine is listed
on bigred.home.mindspring.com)?
And as for it being a contraction of "Ohayo gozaimasu": why would I say
"good morning" when what I mean is "OK, fire away"?
I remain somewhat confused.
James
PC Jensen
<rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
>PC Jensen wrote:
>>
>> Go http://www.amaks.com and search the archive for "ossu" and "osu". I
>> think the latest thread on the subject was sometime last Fall.
>>
>> Another indispensable source of course is:
>> http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/shotokan_faq/terms.html
>
>Thank you. I read as much of the thread as came up,
Good - as I recall, the thread had most of the important ingredients
of an AMAKS discussion.
>and the general
>consensus seems to have been that "ossu" is vulgar and unnecessarily
>macho. I quote :
>
>"The shortest definition of osu: 'Yo! Whassup wid you!'"
>
>Why do we say this in a respectable dojo (incidentally, mine is listed
>on bigred.home.mindspring.com)?
Beats me. In fact, in our dojo, we have almost stopped saying it
lately. Even the seniors find it increasingly silly to grunt something
they either don't understand or don't mean.
>And as for it being a contraction of "Ohayo gozaimasu": why would I say
>"good morning" when what I mean is "OK, fire away"?
Americans can greet you with the seemingly empathic and caring phrase
"How are you?" and mean: "You can drop dead right now for all I care".
That's not very different, is it?
>I remain somewhat confused.
That may well have to do with the kind of clarity you are seeking. :-)
James Goldman
> Beats me. In fact, in our dojo, we have almost stopped saying it
> lately. Even the seniors find it increasingly silly to grunt something
> they either don't understand or don't mean.
Great. And in two weeks, a certain 8th Dan master is flying up from
Colorado (his name escapes me for the moment) to do a grading. Now I'm
going to feel a right berk saying "ossu" in front of him.
Incidentally, if it's common practice in the dojo to say it, should I go
right ahead as before, or should I be all pedantic and say "wakarimasu"
when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
kumite should begin? What about the blackbelts saying dojo kun in
Japanese? This is a serious question, because I'm equally averse to the
idea of appearing to try and teach something to people who are clearly
much better than me. On the other hand, if they've been doing it so
long, how come they don't know?
> That may well have to do with the kind of clarity you are seeking. :-)
This has always been a problem for me. The universe ought to be easily
understood by someone of my awesome intellectual powers. ;) j/k
James
ven...@webtv.net
understood by someone of my awesome intellectual powers."
Possibly you have found a home here on AMAKS.
At any rate, I think you should take a tour of The Thirty Seven Cambers,
for orientation purposes.PC may give you the url, if he will.If you are
still sane when you are done,and Bushido Meditatio has not done for you,
you will be a finer person, with your character much imroved and your
mind well-controlled:-), when you return from this mind-altering
metaphysical excursion into a Taoist Computer-Guru's Post Asparagus
Pizza-Eating Nightmare.
Well James? You game?What Ho?
Regards, John Genjumin Vengel(Osu!:-)
ven...@webtv.net
Chambers-Still a couple left Open.:-)
James Goldman
> With a few notorious exceptions, this is what AMAKS does to its
> participants. :-) Anyway, if he expects you to "ossu" him, give him
> what we wants.
I thought that might be the best way.
> you can live with. The language issue is not a moral one, imo.
No, but still, don't you feel a little uncomfortable speaking someone
else's language in from of them? The problem is it takes me almost no
effort at all to imagine the equivalent e.g. a Japanese groupie saying
to an American rock-star: "You purees to sign aruburum?"
James
P.S. I have acertained that said master 8th dan is flying up _on a
plane_. I know. After all those years of bad ninja movies, I was
disappointed too.
PC Jensen
<rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
>PC Jensen wrote:
>> Beats me. In fact, in our dojo, we have almost stopped saying it
>> lately. Even the seniors find it increasingly silly to grunt something
>> they either don't understand or don't mean.
>
>Great. And in two weeks, a certain 8th Dan master is flying up from
>Colorado (his name escapes me for the moment) to do a grading. Now I'm
>going to feel a right berk saying "ossu" in front of him.
With a few notorious exceptions, this is what AMAKS does to its
participants. :-) Anyway, if he expects you to "ossu" him, give him
what we wants.
>Incidentally, if it's common practice in the dojo to say it, should I go
>right ahead as before, or should I be all pedantic and say "wakarimasu"
>when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
>kumite should begin?
If you should manage to give him the impression that you understand
and speak some Japanese, he will probably say something that'll leave
you in the dark completely, thus pushing you farther up the creek. Why
not try English, if you want to experiment?
>What about the blackbelts saying dojo kun in Japanese?
Oh yes. More for you in the archive there, James, and at:
http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/shotokan_faq/dojokun.html
There is additional stuff in the 37 chambers - you can jump in at:
http://inet.uni2.dk/home/pc/amaks37/amaks11.html
>This is a serious question, because I'm equally averse to the
>idea of appearing to try and teach something to people who are clearly
>much better than me. On the other hand, if they've been doing it so
>long, how come they don't know?
You ask very good questions. Think about it before you make any
changes. To be right is not necessarily the same as being happy. In
the end, you are the only one who can decide what kind of compromises
you can live with. The language issue is not a moral one, imo.
>The universe ought to be easily
>understood by someone of my awesome intellectual powers. ;) j/k
This question, too, is to some extent covered in the archive. With the
right search words, you will find posts explaining how to perceive the
universe directly using zero intellectual power. :-)
Andrew Knowles
>Great. And in two weeks, a certain 8th Dan master is flying up from
>Colorado
So *that's* the requirement for 8th dan. I think I shall have to
practise a bit more.
>(his name escapes me for the moment) to do a grading. Now I'm
>going to feel a right berk saying "ossu" in front of him.
So the fact that you are wearing white pyjamas in public does not
disturb you at all?
>Incidentally, if it's common practice in the dojo to say it, should I
go
>right ahead as before, or should I be all pedantic and say
"wakarimasu"
>when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
>kumite should begin?
Is it really going to make any difference if you exchange one foreign
word that few people understand for another foreign word that few
people understand?
FWIW, a few of the people in my dojo say "Moose".
>> That may well have to do with the kind of clarity you are seeking.
:-)
>
>This has always been a problem for me. The universe ought to be
easily
>understood by someone of my awesome intellectual powers. ;) j/k
Such modesty :). You'll go far.
Andrew
Andy Upton
I am a 4th Dan Instructor of Shotokan Karate in England, and I was told that
" oss " is a bastardised version of the word " Bushi " ( warrior
) , which is how two martial artists would address each other when passing
in the street.
Andy Upton
es Goldman wrote in message
<370661BB...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com>...
>PC Jensen wrote:
>>
>> Go http://www.amaks.com and search the archive for "ossu" and "osu". I
>> think the latest thread on the subject was sometime last Fall.
>>
>> Another indispensable source of course is:
>> http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/shotokan_faq/terms.html
>
>Thank you. I read as much of the thread as came up, and the general
>consensus seems to have been that "ossu" is vulgar and unnecessarily
>macho. I quote :
>
>"The shortest definition of osu: 'Yo! Whassup wid you!'"
>
>Why do we say this in a respectable dojo (incidentally, mine is listed
>on bigred.home.mindspring.com)?
>
>And as for it being a contraction of "Ohayo gozaimasu": why would I say
>"good morning" when what I mean is "OK, fire away"?
>
PC Jensen
<and...@mail.cybase.co.uk> wrote:
>I am a 4th Dan Instructor of Shotokan Karate in England,
Andrew has already told you once that posting your rank is against
this group's conventions. If you want to change our conventions you
have better make a good case for it. Repeating the same mistake won't
swing it.
>and I was told that " oss " is a bastardised version of the word " Bushi "
Horse manure. Keep your hearsay to yourself.
>which is how two martial artists would address each other when passing
>in the street.
Oh, they would? Where, when? You are ready to swallow any dosage of MA
myth and fairy tale, aren't you? If you have anything to do with
Shotokan, post something on Shotokan, and keep the BS to yourself. If
not, be gone.
George Winter
<and...@mail.cybase.co.uk> wrote:
>Hello all,
>I am a 4th Dan Instructor of Shotokan Karate in England,
You have mentioned this before. I think it was pointed out that we
discourage posting our rank - in the end it is what you have to say &
how you say it that will convince others.
>and I was told that
>" oss " is a bastardised version of the word " Bushi " ( warrior
>) , which is how two martial artists would address each other when passing
Caveat: I don't speak japanese, but I've heard about 4 definitions for
Osu. Yours is a definition I have never heard before. I imagine it is
incorrect simply because Samurai had elaborate etiquette for
greeting other samurai in public.
re: the term martial artists: Other than samurai there were really no
"martial artists" in the country, at least as we would understand the
term. There were warior monk sects (I think they used large iron
studded clubs) but they had been mostly wiped out, peseants were
forbidden the study of arms for most of recent japanese history.
--
George
_____________________________________________________________________
George Winter gwi...@q-sys.com
Qsys Ltd.
Information Systems Consulting
Roberto A. Alvelais
<and...@mail.cybase.co.uk> wrote:
>Hello all,
>I am a 4th Dan Instructor of Shotokan Karate in England, and I was told that
>" oss " is a bastardised version of the word " Bushi " ( warrior
>) , which is how two martial artists would address each other when passing
>in the street.
You are mistaken, the person telling you this was referring to your
personal lineage and not anything to do with karate or other martial
arts.
Rob
>Andy Upton
"Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world."
-Dave Barry
ANNE L TAYLOR
Most Exalted Shihan, I really hope for you that you can choose to
speak your native language if you need to speak at all."
I want to make sure I understand you. Are you suggesting that, even if it
is a longstanding tradition in a dojo in (for example) America to use
Japanese terminology, some upstart should just go in and try to change that
and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH?? What if the dojo has a FAQ
that clearly states that Japanese terminology is favored? <G> Seriously,
if this is your position I am a little surprised at the suggestion that
someone else's tradition be trashed. I don't believe you would stand for
the same revisionism here at AMAKS. My dojo has been around for thirty
years and many of the sempai have been training much longer than I. I would
never dream of defying well-established traditions.
If that's not your position please clarify.
PC Jensen
<rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
>PC Jensen wrote:
>> With a few notorious exceptions, this is what AMAKS does to its
>> participants. :-) Anyway, if he expects you to "ossu" him, give him
>> what we wants.
>I thought that might be the best way.
Unless you are ready to find out what happens if you don't. I can't
decide on your behalf, but my guess is you aren't. :-)
>> you can live with. The language issue is not a moral one, imo.
>No, but still, don't you feel a little uncomfortable speaking someone
>else's language in from of them?
If I am ordering food in rural Italy, no, but speaking Shotokanese or
Shogunese in the dojo (no matter who is present) and pretending it's
Japanese, I'd feel a damned fool, all right. That's one reason why I
didn't/don't recommend it. But it's still not a moral issue.
>The problem is it takes me almost no
>effort at all to imagine the equivalent e.g. a Japanese groupie saying
>to an American rock-star: "You purees to sign aruburum?"
Not equivalent in my book. As with me in rural Italy, your groupie has
no choice. In a dojo in an English speaking country, even with the
Most Exalted Shihan, I really hope for you that you can choose to
speak your native language if you need to speak at all.
--
Mark A Goetsch
PC Jensen <p...@eme.dk> wrote in message
news:3707faf4...@news.uni2.dk...
>Not equivalent in my book. As with me in rural Italy, your groupie has
>no choice. In a dojo in an English speaking country, even with the
>Most Exalted Shihan, I really hope for you that you can choose to
>speak your native language if you need to speak at all.
You have to seperate the language of the dojo (which in many cases is
Japanese) from the idea that you are speaking Japanese. It just isn't a
sensible idea. If we start just using 'English' terms (which is a mixture of
bastardised German and Anglo) then let us do so consistantly. That means
that we should refer to pizza as "crap on bread" or Hamburger as "Beef
Patti".
To explain the difference an example is in order. I occasionally train with
someone that spent the last 8 years in Japan. While he will say "Hai" as
well as use Japanese terms in the Dojo, he does not speak Japanese beyond
that. I asked him why and he just replied that it didn't feel right. So
clearly he sees a difference.
Mark
Eoin Clarke
Goldman <rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
> should I be all pedantic and say "wakarimasu"
> when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
> kumite should begin?
No, you shouldn't.
Eoin
Eoin Clarke eo...@gol.com
Paul Willoughby
<ATI...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> I would
>never dream of defying well-established traditions.
>
Why?
Paul
PC Jensen
<no...@enteract.com> wrote:
>
>PC Jensen <p...@eme.dk> wrote in message
>news:3707faf4...@news.uni2.dk...
>
>
>>Not equivalent in my book. As with me in rural Italy, your groupie has
>>no choice. In a dojo in an English speaking country, even with the
>>Most Exalted Shihan, I really hope for you that you can choose to
>>speak your native language if you need to speak at all.
>You have to seperate the language of the dojo (which in many cases is
>Japanese) from the idea that you are speaking Japanese.
What you have to do is separate "terminology" (which in many cases
resembles Japanese) from the "language of the dojo" (which in most
cases in your country resembles English). See my reply to Anne Taylor.
--
PC Jensen
http://www.pc.suite.dk
PC Jensen
<ATI...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Re: ". In a dojo in an English speaking country, even with the
>Most Exalted Shihan, I really hope for you that you can choose to
>speak your native language if you need to speak at all."
Make it clear who you are quoting. Why do your readers have to page
around to find out?
>I want to make sure I understand you. Are you suggesting that, even if it
>is a longstanding tradition in a dojo in (for example) America to use
>Japanese terminology, some upstart should just go in and try to change that
>and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH??
You didn't read and you didn't think. I said nothing about "upstarts"
insisting on anything. Like so many others, you confuse the
terminology question with the language that is spoken in the dojo:
Examples: If you have a question for your instructor, do you phrase it
in Japanese? I bet you don't, and I bet you can't. If your instructor
explains something to the class, does he explain it in Japanese? If
you are told that Monday classes have been cancelled, that you have to
clean up the locker room after you, that Bert has left the club to go
train somewhere else, that the grade test will be on Friday 13th, - or
any other stupid tidbit of information that needs to be passed around
the club: Do they give you all this information in Japanese? NO.
Name one dojo in America (with average, all-American students, of
course, we're not talking Japanese colonies here) that wouldn't fall
apart overnight if everything had to be communicated in Japanese!
If you can, you have also named a dojo where no questions, technical
or otherwise, are ever asked - and where no explanations, technical or
otherwise, are ever given. In that dojo, all that ever happens, class
after class, is the instructor grunting commands in his particular
rendition of "Japanese terminology" - a "language" without sentences,
syntax, or grammar. That dojo has deliberately chosen to minimize the
speed and depth of their students' learning.
So back to the quote you started with: If student James can't ask a
question in English or if teacher James can't give his English-
speaking students explanation or information in that language, James
is a fool paying good money for his right to be a fool.
As you see, terminology in itself covers only a small and trivial
subset of the communication that is needed in a dojo. A vocabulary of
some 3-400 phrases can be learned over a couple of years by even the
sub-average Joe/Joan - no matter how exotic and foreign the phrases
are. Terminologies are not languages.
Whether terminology should be "Japanese" or "English" has caused a
number of heated debates in AMAKS. I suggest you consult the archive.
The general sentiment is that terminology should be de-japanofied, but
so far, no-one has made a serious, systematic effort to do it.
>Seriously, if this is your position I am a little surprised at the suggestion that
>someone else's tradition be trashed.
I will trash any tradition I find stupid or harmful. Why is it that to
make a change, you have to think, reason, and argue, but to keep
things the way they are, no matter how sorry a state they're in, you
can just quip "tradition"? Bearers of tradition rarely think, reason
or argue about it - they have adapted it because someone told them to,
period.
>I don't believe you would stand for the same revisionism here at AMAKS.
Try me/us. You obviously have very little idea of what AMAKS is.
>My dojo has been around for thirty years and many of the sempai have
>been training much longer than I. I would never dream of defying
>well-established traditions.
If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions, what
could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
this forum? AMAKS was and is the only international public forum for
questioning and criticizing "well-established traditions" within
Shotokan. If you came to AMAKS to muse about the wonders of tradition
and to expose your gullibility (which you probably like to call
"loyality" or "humility" yourself) you have made a bad choice.
George Winter
James Goldman
> So back to the quote you started with: If student James can't ask a
> question in English or if teacher James can't give his English-
> speaking students explanation or information in that language, James
> is a fool paying good money for his right to be a fool.
> As you see, terminology in itself covers only a small and trivial
> subset of the communication that is needed in a dojo. A vocabulary of
> some 3-400 phrases can be learned over a couple of years by even the
> sub-average Joe/Joan - no matter how exotic and foreign the phrases
> are. Terminologies are not languages.
I agree.
We're not required to speak Japanese in the dojo. We do use the Japanese
terms for various techniques, but that just makes sense to me. Why
invent an English word when you already have a perfectly good one? Why
not, instead, simply use the Japanese word and *make* it English? This
is exactly what the English speaking world has been doing for the last
thousand years.
I've had a few arguments along these lines with a friend of mine who
lived in France for a few years. He thinks that the Academie Francaise
is a good thing because it helps to "preserve" the French language. My
position is exactly the opposite, that a living language should grab any
useful words it finds in any other language. I'm perfectly happy using
foreign words. If I wasn't I'd be speaking Old English and no one would
understand me.
What I am questioning is why we say "ossu" or "shomen-ni rei!", and why
the senior belts are expected to know dojo kun (a perfect example of
something that sounds good in Japanese, but would sound awkward in
English) in Japanese, when we lowly kyus say it in English. It seems
akin to the old Catholic church preaching in Latin, when nobody
understood it.
> Bearers of tradition rarely think, reason or argue about it - they
> have adapted it because someone told them to, period.
<WARNING: Anecdotal stuff ahead>
A woman was preparing a roast for dinner. Just before she put it in the
pot, she got out a knife and cut a slice off the side. Curious, her
young daughter, who had been watching, asked why she did that. The woman
thought a while, and then said "I don't know. It's just the way my Mom
used to do it".
This had her wondering, so she called her mother, who said the same
thing, namely that *her* mother had always done that. So they called the
great grandmother, who immediately said that it was because their pot
was too small to hold the whole thing, so she used to have to cut a
slice off of it.
</Anecdotal stuff>
Apparently this is a true story, and if it isn't, it's a good
illustration of what you are saying. Something gets carried along for
generations without any thought or reason.
Another example: Why do so many Yugoslavs hate each other? Because of
some battle in the fourteenth century? Talk about not thinking.
> If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions, what
> could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
> this forum?
Well, I'm not afraid to defy tradition, by any means. But that's in
areas where I have experience and the respect of others. By starting
this thread I only meant to get some info (always my downfall - what was
that about a cat and curiosity?). I'm far too green at this stage to do
anything but what I'm told. And yes, that's humility, I guess. Either
that or an unwillingness to look like a prat ;)
James
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, guys, the spam filter stays.
Tom Mitchell
Skip the concern about ossu.
First get the man's name correct!
A polite bow from the class when a senior man/woman walks into
the room goes a long way.....
On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, James Goldman
wrote:
> Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 14:18:18 -0700
> From: James Goldman <rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.martial-arts.karate.shotokan
> Subject: Re: What exactly does "usu" mean? ^v^
>
> PC Jensen wrote:
> > Beats me. In fact, in our dojo, we have almost stopped saying it
> > lately. Even the seniors find it increasingly silly to grunt something
> > they either don't understand or don't mean.
>
> Great. And in two weeks, a certain 8th Dan master is flying up from
> Colorado (his name escapes me for the moment) to do a grading. Now I'm
> going to feel a right berk saying "ossu" in front of him.
>
> Incidentally, if it's common practice in the dojo to say it, should I go
> right ahead as before, or should I be all pedantic and say "wakarimasu"
> when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
> kumite should begin? What about the blackbelts saying dojo kun in
> Japanese? This is a serious question, because I'm equally averse to the
> idea of appearing to try and teach something to people who are clearly
> much better than me. On the other hand, if they've been doing it so
> long, how come they don't know?
>
> > That may well have to do with the kind of clarity you are seeking. :-)
>
> This has always been a problem for me. The universe ought to be easily
> understood by someone of my awesome intellectual powers. ;) j/k
>
> James
>
>
>
Roberto A. Alvelais
<ATI...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>My dojo has been around for thirty
>years and many of the sempai have been training much longer than I. I would
>never dream of defying well-established traditions.
Tell me,
was it "tradition" not to have women in the dojo for some of that 30
years?
Women didn't grade to black belt for a large part of those 30 years at
that dojo, I'll wager. Does that qualify as a tradition.
This osu stuff is silly. If an instructor, any instructor, gets
upset with someone responding to them in a polite manner but in
English , the instructor has a terrible problem and you should leave
immediately.
Rob
PC Jensen
<rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
>PC Jensen wrote:
>> So back to the quote you started with: If student James can't ask a
>> question in English or if teacher James can't give his English-
>> speaking students explanation or information in that language, James
>> is a fool paying good money for his right to be a fool.
>> As you see, terminology in itself covers only a small and trivial
>> subset of the communication that is needed in a dojo. A vocabulary of
>> some 3-400 phrases can be learned over a couple of years by even the
>> sub-average Joe/Joan - no matter how exotic and foreign the phrases
>> are. Terminologies are not languages.
>I agree.
OK.
>We're not required to speak Japanese in the dojo. We do use the Japanese
>terms for various techniques, but that just makes sense to me. Why
>invent an English word when you already have a perfectly good one?
This is where I get off the train. This debate has been going on and
off so long now it has started to *really* bore me. The debate is very
energetic each time it pops up, but so far, all the energy has been
converted to heat. None of it has gone into compiling an extensive
list of English terms to replace the Japanese. Until that happens, the
debate remains academic in my view.
>> Bearers of tradition rarely think, reason or argue about it - they
>> have adapted it because someone told them to, period.
><WARNING: Anecdotal stuff ahead>
<snip anecdote>
You got it. Similar examples all over the world, in all matters big
and small.
>> If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions, what
>> could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
>> this forum?
>Well, I'm not afraid to defy tradition, by any means. But that's in
>areas where I have experience and the respect of others. By starting
>this thread I only meant to get some info (always my downfall - what was
>that about a cat and curiosity?).
What downfall? So far, you are in good shape, aren't you?
>I'm far too green at this stage to do anything but what I'm told.
Well, I can understand that, and I think rushing out to make major
changes/waves without knowing what one does is just as stupid as
blindly following tradition. Anyway, in the meantime (as your color
changes <g>) you can have fun asking "Why?". You have a right to know
the reason for the things you are required to do. The responses you
get will give you a fair idea of your instructors' competency. If
asking sincere and polite questions turns out be a socially suicidal
project, leave the org and go train somewhere else.
>And yes, that's humility, I guess. Either
>that or an unwillingness to look like a prat ;)
Go easy on the H-word, James. It rarely ever applies where people
think it does. :-)
Rose Humphrey
buccal orifice in no uncertain manner:
>
> I am a 4th Dan Instructor of Shotokan Karate in England,
We don't want to know. You've been told that. If you're really a 4th
dan, how come we have to say things twice?
> and I was told that
> " oss " is a bastardised version of the word " Bushi " ( warrior) ,
And I presume you also believe the one about the haggis being a small
wild animal with the legs on one side longer than the other?
> which is how two martial artists would address each other when
passing
> in the street.
How do you recognise another martial artist in the street? Tattooed on
the back of the neck, is it?
--
Rose
Rose Humphrey
>
> If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions,
what
> could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
for
> questioning and criticizing "well-established traditions" within
> Shotokan. If you came to AMAKS to muse about the wonders of
tradition
> and to expose your gullibility (which you probably like to call
> "loyality" or "humility" yourself) you have made a bad choice.
Someone carve this in letters of fire on purest Carrera marble and
hang it up over the entrance to this newsgroup.
--
Rose
Exalted Whosis of the Grammar and Syntax Police
Feeler of Collars to the Ungrammatical
Joel Young
>
> Tell me,
> was it "tradition" not to have women in the dojo for some of that 30
> years?
I bet the women in Anne's dojo have to sit in seizan with
their knees together...
Joel Young
jyo...@erols.com
George Winter
Isn't it seiza or zazen? Or are you flouting tradition :-)
ANNE L TAYLOR
have to page around to find out?>>
repeating the date, time, author, and e-mail addy of the person to whom you
are specifically responding. Is there a tool on Outlook Express for this?
Or do I have to actually type it out every time (yikes)? I'll try to
remember to do it, in any event.
<<You didn't read and you didn't think. >>
<<Like so many others, you confuse the terminology question with the
Well, no I don't, but perhaps your post wasn't clear. Re: speaking Japanese
as the basic LANGUAGE in a dojo in an English-speaking country -- are there
really places where this is done? If that's your topic it would be hard to
disagree with you. Still, I wouldn't burst in and shout "Speak English!" I
would just find another dojo. If there aren't places where this is done,
why are you discussing it?
Re: terminology -- this is what I thought your subject was, and I find it
intriguing (although not earth-shattering as some folks seem to view it.)
Yes, I favor using Japanese terminology. Heck, I even kiai in Japanese.
<G>
<<Whether terminology should be "Japanese" or "English" has caused a number
of heated debates in AMAKS. I suggest you consult the archive.>>
to respond, I wouldn't be HERE now, would I? I'm more interested in
discussion than in reading what was already discussed last year. Thought
that's what this NG was about.
<<I will trash any tradition I find stupid or harmful. >>
"stupid or harmful" to use Japanese terminology in the study of karate in a
dojo? (Or do you study "open-handed combat" in a "studio"?)
<<You obviously have very little idea of what AMAKS is.>>
seem VERY touchy about the FAQ and following the rules. I'm not criticizing
it at all, just making a point. If you're suggesting that folks here
tolerate violations of the FAQ then you're right -- I have misjudged the
place.
<<If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions, what
could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
this forum?>>
mostly for information and somewhat to raise a little friendly verbal ruckus
(within the confines of the FAQ as best I understand it). It's what I live
for. <G>
<<AMAKS was and is the only international public forum for
questioning and criticizing "well-established traditions" within
Shotokan. >>
with you before posting. If so, I must have received an outdated FAQ
because that requirement isn't in there. Nah, that would be too boring.
Who are you going to flame if everyone agrees with you?
ANNE L TAYLOR
the dojo for some of that 30 years?>>
to start the dojo. And, sensei does not reveal any bias toward women.
Of course, excluding women wouldn't be a "tradition;" it would be a mindless
bias. Semantic? Probably -- and if that's your point, it's a good one.
While there is a place for tradition, I do not blindly follow tradition
wherever it may rear its sometimes-ugly head. I was only discussing one
tradition.
Even in a dojo that excluded women, though, I wouldn't bust in and demand a
black belt. I would find another dojo.
<<If an instructor, any instructor, gets
upset with someone responding to them in a polite manner but in
English , the instructor has a terrible problem and you should leave
immediately. >>
feel silly, just as if I had walked into my neighbor's home and started
rearranging the pictures on the wall.
Simon Slavin
James Goldman <rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
> PC Jensen wrote:
> > Beats me. In fact, in our dojo, we have almost stopped saying it
> > lately. Even the seniors find it increasingly silly to grunt something
> > they either don't understand or don't mean.
>
> Incidentally, if it's common practice in the dojo to say it, should I go
> right ahead as before, or should I be all pedantic and say "wakarimasu"
> when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
> kumite should begin? What about the blackbelts saying dojo kun in
> Japanese? This is a serious question, because I'm equally averse to the
> idea of appearing to try and teach something to people who are clearly
> much better than me. On the other hand, if they've been doing it so
> long, how come they don't know?
I'm having a big problem with this in my classes (I learn, not
teach). When I started learning Karate we counted in Japanese
and said 'oos' a lot. Now the counting happens in English and
my current teachers want 'oos' said at different times. This
I can cope with except for one thing: kumite.
Something that got taught in my first class was that in kumite
the attacker announces the attack and makes sure that the
defender is ready. We did this by having the defender say
'oos' to acknowledge 'jodan' or whatever. For some reason
this sunk into my subconscious and I loved it dearly. So much
so that I still say it a decade later before I remember that
my current teacher doesn't like it. It's a major triumph when
I catch myself in time and stay silent.
I still think it's a good idea -- make sure your opponent did
hear your attack announcement.
Simon.
--
No junk email please. | What a story !
<http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk> | I can't wait to embellish it.
| -- Elaine from _Ally McBeal_
ptane...@my-dejanews.com
James Goldman <rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
> So what, exactly, does "usu" mean? ...
"Javohl, Herr Kapitan!"
At least, that's the way it always felt to me.
---
Paul T.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Joel Young
gwi...@q-sys.com (George Winter) writes:
> On 5 Apr 1999 22:28:56 GMT, jdy...@m486.young (Joel Young) wrote:
>
>>In article <3709157f...@nntp.best.com>,
>> r...@jko.com (Roberto A. Alvelais) writes:
>>> On Sun, 4 Apr 1999 18:27:37 -0700, "ANNE L TAYLOR"
>>>>My dojo has been around for thirty years
>>>
>>> Tell me,
>>> was it "tradition" not to have women in the dojo for some of that 30
>>> years?
>>
>>their knees together...
>
> Isn't it seiza or zazen? Or are you flouting tradition :-)
Damn! Musta been that durned drawl messin up mah dem dare
spellun. Do you think if I go back and edit the quote,
any one will notice?
Isn't any fun to go harassin' someone and then
screwin' up. Did ja know, in the Air Force, they teach
you to write like you talk?
Joel
jyo...@erols.com
Joel Young
slavins.at.hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost (Simon Slavin) writes:
> I still think it's a good idea -- make sure your opponent did
> hear your attack announcement.
We used to say "oos" also after an attack was announced.
Now the club I am with just repeats the name of the attack.
Took a bit of getting used, but now I like it better--gives
more positive feedback that the attacker said what they
thought they said and that the defender heard what the
attacker said.
Joel
jyo...@erols.com
ven...@webtv.net
you talk?"
Well, Krap, Joel, Ah yooze too bee in Thair Force m'self, y'no!:-)
Taken me years to get over it.:-)
John "Wild Blue Yonder" Vengel
ven...@webtv.net
Lotta stuff about our sacred archives.
^V^ ^V^^V^^V^^V^^V^^V^^V^V^^V^^V^
You should go there and look, if you want to find fuel it's all there.
But no one can make you.
If you wanna start arguments here, the archves are so you can find out
if it's old news.And after all, there is a search vengel I mean search
engine there.
BTW, you say you kiai in Japanese.Tell me ou don't shout KIAI! No one in
Japan does.I've seen dojo where they do in America, and I never laughed
so hard in my life.
So, how does one kiai in Nihongo?
Regards, Genjumin
Andrew Knowles
>And I presume you also believe the one about the haggis being a small
>wild animal with the legs on one side longer than the other?
I thought it had three legs and a funny checked pattern, and could be
easily be converted to bagpipes by drilling out the legs and inserting
a hollow tube into either end.
Andrew
Andrew Knowles
>PC Jensen wrote:
>>Make it clear who you are quoting. Why do your readers
>>have to page around to find out?
>Because I'm still new at this.
Not any more.
>Y'all seem to have the same convention for
>repeating the date, time, author, and e-mail addy of the person to
whom you
>are specifically responding. Is there a tool on Outlook Express for
this?
Not that I have been able to find. It is not one of the better
newsreaders :(
>>Whether terminology should be "Japanese" or "English" has caused a
number
>>of heated debates in AMAKS. I suggest you consult the archive.>>
>If I wanted to read a series of old posts to which it is no longer
possible
>to respond, I wouldn't be HERE now, would I? I'm more interested in
>discussion than in reading what was already discussed last year.
>Thought that's what this NG was about.
"No", he said, bravely resisting the desire to flame. This newsgroup
is, at present, a forum where anything pertaining to Shotokan can be
discussed without being hampered by the usual heirarchical and
doctrinal constraints.
But, since we are all here of our own free will, we will respond only
if we wish to. Continually rehashing the same tired arguments becomes
quickly tedious, so the liklihood of people responding to old
discussion topics diminishes rapidly.
We now have an excellent archive, maintained by our Mr Winter. You
can now find the current thinking of the group on a whole host of
subjects. This, in itself, is a valuable resource, as there are many
things covered which do not get touched on in the standard syllabus,
and there are many well argued views that contradict accepted dogma.
The archive also allows you determine which subjects have been flogged
to death. If you wish to resurrect one of these subjects, feel free -
you only have to start a new thread. But if the topic *has* been
thrashed, don't expect a big response.
>>You obviously have very little idea of what AMAKS is.
>The reason I said that about AMAKS is based on what I've observed.
People
>seem VERY touchy about the FAQ and following the rules. I'm not
criticizing
>it at all, just making a point. If you're suggesting that folks here
>tolerate violations of the FAQ then you're right -- I have misjudged
the
>place.
The FAQ contains only three rules:
1. All posted articles must relate to Shotokan karate or continue
threads that relate to Shotokan karate.
2. No advertisements or announcements.
3. Do not cross-post [x-post] anything to AMAKS and another newsgroup.
We *are* very touchy about following these three rules. It keeps our
newsgroup a nice, uncluttered place to be.
Provided you stay within the confines of these three rules, you can do
whatever you like BUT you must be prepared to accept the consequences.
>>If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions,
what
>>could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
>>this forum?
>I didn't come here to TELL you folks anything; trust me on this.
>I came mostly for information
But you are not prepared to go look for it.
>and somewhat to raise a little friendly verbal ruckus
>(within the confines of the FAQ as best I understand it). It's what
I live
>for. <G>
Do you really? I wonder...
>>AMAKS was and is the only international public forum for
>>questioning and criticizing "well-established traditions" within
>>Shotokan.
>Be that as it may, surely you don't insist that everyone who posts
agree
>with you before posting.
No.
> If so, I must have received an outdated FAQ
>because that requirement isn't in there.
Again with the FAQ. I have never come across someone more obsessed
with the bloody thing.
>Who are you going to flame if everyone agrees with you?
Whoever we want to.
Anne, could you please set out you posts a little better. White space
is a useful commodity in aiding understanding.
Andrew
MissIllona
>Japan does.I've seen dojo where they do in America, and I never laughed so
hard in my life.>
We have a school here in town that does and I almost peed my pants .... I was
laughing so hard!
So stupid.
Illona
Eoin Clarke
<ATI...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Heck, I even kiai in Japanese.
Please explain how you "kiai in Japanese". How do you know if you're doing
it correctly? And from a personal interest, why in the world do you do it?
Eoin
Eoin Clarke eo...@gol.com
Paul Willoughby
<ATI...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Because I'm still new at this. Y'all seem to have the same convention for
>repeating the date, time, author, and e-mail addy of the person to whom you
>are specifically responding. Is there a tool on Outlook Express for this?
>Or do I have to actually type it out every time (yikes)?
You should try downloading Forte's FreeAgent software. It explains
about it in the FAQ. It took me some prodding before I tried it out
and I have been much happier reading the Newsgroup ever since.
Now, you still haven't answered my question. Why would you never
think of defying tradition??
Paul
Paul Willoughby
slavins.at.hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost (Simon Slavin) wrote:
>
>Something that got taught in my first class was that in kumite
>the attacker announces the attack and makes sure that the
>defender is ready. We did this by having the defender say
>'oos' to acknowledge 'jodan' or whatever. For some reason
>this sunk into my subconscious and I loved it dearly. So much
>so that I still say it a decade later before I remember that
>my current teacher doesn't like it. It's a major triumph when
>I catch myself in time and stay silent.
>
>I still think it's a good idea -- make sure your opponent did
>hear your attack announcement.
Why not use "hai"? However, always be ready once the attack is
announced.
Paul
PC Jensen
slavins.at.hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost (Simon Slavin) wrote:
>I'm having a big problem with this in my classes (I learn, not
>teach). When I started learning Karate we counted in Japanese
>and said 'oos' a lot. Now the counting happens in English and
>my current teachers want 'oos' said at different times.
Like, when?
>the attacker announces the attack and makes sure that the
>defender is ready. We did this by having the defender say
>'oos' to acknowledge 'jodan' or whatever. <... snip ...>
>my current teacher doesn't like it.
>I still think it's a good idea -- make sure your opponent did
>hear your attack announcement.
I'll admit it does a certain something for peace in the dojo, but can
you clarify a little: Don't your teachers think it's a good idea or do
they want you to say something else? Like, what?
ATIFFEN
<< This newsgroup is, at present, a forum where anything pertaining to
Shotokan can be discussed>>
Yes, that's what I thought it was. I would prefer not to have to consult
the archives every time I venture a thought for discussion on a topic.
However, if the topic has been beat to death and nobody answers me, I'm
prepared to accept that as the consequence. I will also happily check
the archive for information (as opposed to discussion). So, yes, I am
repared to go look for information.
<<Again with the FAQ. I have never come across someone more obsessed
with the bloody thing.>>
LOL. I had the same reaction when I encountered this place. It is
invoked in a good third of the responses, seems like. There's even
someone here -- maybe it is you? -- who responds to entire notes by
simply typing "FAQ" or maybe it's "FAQ'd."
Thanks for the suggestion on white space.
ATIFFEN
My remark about kiaing in Japanese was intended as humor. Observe the
<G>. I thought it was funny precisely because you can't kiai (or grunt,
or laugh, or groan) "in Japanese."
I have heard a few white belts actually say "kiai," but not entire dojos.
We have one nidan who says "ossu" for his kiai, which I think is
strange. I struggled for a while trying to develop a kiai that didn't
sound stupid to me. I wonder if other people have had the same
challenge.
ATIFFEN
See my note to Genjumin. It was a JOKE. <G>
ATIFFEN
try it tonight when I'm not on the dinosaur I'm on now.
I didn't mean to ignore your question but thought my other notes had
answered it. To me, wandering into someone else's place and trying to
change the traditions is like going into their home and rearranging the
pictures on the wall. I'm sure there are situations where I would defy
what someone else thinks is a "tradition" if it is interfering with my
rights. But I wasn't addressing those situations. I spoke more broadly,
I suppose, than the situation warranted.
George Winter
wrote:
There were actually a few suggested kiai - as many of the sounds we
use are words in japanese. I of course have forgotten them.
Shawn Jefferson
<rocke...@DIESPAMMYBASTARDS.hotmail.com> wrote:
>Great. And in two weeks, a certain 8th Dan master is flying up from
>Colorado (his name escapes me for the moment) to do a grading. Now I'm
>going to feel a right berk saying "ossu" in front of him.
>
>Incidentally, if it's common practice in the dojo to say it, should I go
>right ahead as before, or should I be all pedantic and say "wakarimasu"
>when Sensei teaches something, and "atari" when I mean to say that
>kumite should begin? What about the blackbelts saying dojo kun in
>Japanese? This is a serious question, because I'm equally averse to the
>idea of appearing to try and teach something to people who are clearly
>much better than me. On the other hand, if they've been doing it so
>long, how come they don't know?
You could do what I've done. Stop saying it. I never say osu anymore
and I don't recite the dojokun after the class (when I'm at a club
that does this).
See if anybody says anything. In my case they don't... Your mileage
may vary.
Or you could walk up to your instructor and ask him why he says it.
Then when he tells you 'because my instructor said it' or 'they did it
that way at my club.' Point him in the direction of someone who knows
what it means or better yet someone who speaks Japanese but doesn't
practice karate. Then, after he tells you that you don't know what
you're talking about because you haven't been training for 25 years
than you can go back to choice number one.
---
Shawn Jefferson
sjeffers(at)home(dot)com
P. Bromaghin
> There's even
> someone here -- maybe it is you? -- who responds to entire notes by
> simply typing "FAQ" or maybe it's "FAQ'd."
He does that so everybody else knows they don't need to send the newbie a
FAQ.
> Thanks for the suggestion on white space.
Thank you for taking his suggestion. Your posts are much easier to read.
You may even find that people are nicer to you because of it. But then
again, you might not.
PC Jensen
<ATI...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>PC Jensen wrote: <<Make it clear who you are quoting. Why do your readers
>have to page around to find out?>>
>Because I'm still new at this. Y'all seem to have the same convention for
>repeating the date, time, author, and e-mail addy of the person to whom you
>are specifically responding. Is there a tool on Outlook Express for this?
I have no idea whether you have this option with Outlook. But go to
http://www.forteinc.com/agent/freagent.htm and download Forté Agent.
It installs like a breeze and it's very user-friendly. You don't have
to be any sort of computer nerd to have it up and running in less than
thirty minutes.The FAQ recommends Agent for good reasons.
><<Whether terminology should be "Japanese" or "English" has caused a number
>of heated debates in AMAKS. I suggest you consult the archive.>>
>If I wanted to read a series of old posts to which it is no longer possible
>to respond, I wouldn't be HERE now, would I? I'm more interested in
>discussion than in reading what was already discussed last year. Thought
>that's what this NG was about.
This forum has a history and a substantial part of it is recorded in
the archive. The rest of it is recorded in the minds of the regulars,
some of which have been around for years. Don't expect us to reset
history and start from scratch, just because you have finally arrived.
You do everybody, including yourself, a favour by checking the archive
before you raise a question. If that question has been sufficiently
answered already, why waste each other's time?
A lot of effort has been put into preserving AMAKS discussions and
whatever conclusions or results they have arrived at. Think about it.
Most NGs are day-to-day fragments accumulating forever without
transforming into knowledge. Take a tour of www.amaks.com and the
resources and links you find there. That will give you an idea of what
this NG is about. It's truly something else.
And who says you can't respond to an old post? You will find lots of
loose ends in any discussion. Nothing prevents you from posting
something that runs like this: "In the archive, I saw that X raised a
question about Y without really getting any response. Does anyone have
any information or point of view on that question today?" A little
research, a little creativity and you might come up with an
interesting contribution.
><<You obviously have very little idea of what AMAKS is.>>
>The reason I said that about AMAKS is based on what I've observed. People
>seem VERY touchy about the FAQ and following the rules. I'm not criticizing
>it at all, just making a point. If you're suggesting that folks here
>tolerate violations of the FAQ then you're right -- I have misjudged the
>place.
Look. Most of us have been newbies. Quite a few of us have had
reactions similar to yours - "who are these jerks telling *me* what to
do?". Best advice is to let it go, to turn your current perspective
180 degrees and realize how much the place has to offer at the
reasonable expense that you follow a few no-nonsense rules. If you can
do that, we can get over this real fast. If you can't, your stay will
be short and joyless.
><<If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions, what
>could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
>this forum?>>
>I didn't come here to TELL you folks anything; trust me on this. I came
>mostly for information and somewhat to raise a little friendly verbal ruckus
>(within the confines of the FAQ as best I understand it). It's what I live
>for. <G>
Hold on to that part of yourself.
><<AMAKS was and is the only international public forum for
>questioning and criticizing "well-established traditions" within
>Shotokan. >>
>Be that as it may, surely you don't insist that everyone who posts agree
>with you before posting. If so, I must have received an outdated FAQ
>because that requirement isn't in there. Nah, that would be too boring.
Ah, polemic claws, good, wee bit dull, though, 'cause: if you check
the archive (here we go again) you will *learn* that no-one would
dream of insisting anything like that. It's very fair to say that
informed disagreement is considered a virtue in here - whereas
disagreeing without arguments and logic is a deadly sin. This is one
of the few points where we have an approximate 99.99% agreement.
>Who are you going to flame if everyone agrees with you?
Let's not go into the concept of flaming right now. Just promise me to
contemplate the possible merits of flaming.
ven...@webtv.net
In Okinawan and Chinese arts, and some Japanese ars as well, there are
actually Kiais which are certain sounds.
I asked because I wondered if you knew them.:-)
ANNE L TAYLOR
<<In Okinawan and Chinese arts, and some Japanese ars as well, there are
actually Kiais which are certain sounds.>>
No, until you and George pointed that out I didn't know that. That is
interesting. I always wished someone would explain how one "chooses" the
sound they make in a kiai. I assumed it was a personal decision. Maybe I
should check the archives to see if there is more information on this. But
it's too late for me to change my kiai, I guess.
Anne
ANNE L TAYLOR
<<Don't expect us to reset history and start from scratch, just because you
have finally arrived.>>
LOL! I don't. As I said, if I start a well-worn topic and everyone ignores
me I will understand that that might be the risk of not checking the
archive.
The point I tried to make was that I will happily check the archive for
information. It sounds like a great resourcea and one that folks have spent
a lot of time on. But if I want to stimulate discussion, well, an archive
is a poor substitute. But, I guess you're right about bringing a discussion
back to the group if I find it interesting. Good idea.
<<Best advice is to let it go, to turn your current perspective
180 degrees and realize how much the place has to offer at the
reasonable expense that you follow a few no-nonsense rules. If you can do
that, we can get over this real fast. >>
You really misunderstood me about the FAQ, even though I tried very hard to
make my point clearly. I have no problem whatsoever with the rules. I have
read them carefully and I expect to do my best to follow them whenever I
can. I respect rules. I didn't come in here to rearrange your pictures on
the wall. I consider rules a very small price indeed to pay to visit a
well-organized NG. What I TRIED to communicate was that, just as you
(rightly) expect folks to follow your FAQ, so do dojos, by and large
(rightly) expect folks to follow their traditions.
<<This is one of the few points where we have an approximate 99.99%
agreement. >>
Yikes. Where do we go from here? <G>
<<Just promise me to contemplate the possible merits of flaming.>>
You misunderstood again, I think, and this one is probably my fault. I have
been known to relish a good flame war and I've been in some doozies. A
little moderation, though, may be in order. Or, maybe not. <G>
Anne
ANNE L TAYLOR
<<But, I, for one, will not be paying much attention.>>
ROTFL. I'm crushed.
Anne
DevonErik
>I want to make sure I understand you. Are you suggesting that, even if it
>is a longstanding tradition in a dojo in (for example) America to use
>Japanese terminology, some upstart
Speaking!
>should just go in and try to change that
>and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH??
Yep.
> What if the dojo has a FAQ
>that clearly states that Japanese terminology is favored? <G>
Find a new dojo.
>Seriously,
>if this is your position I am a little surprised at the suggestion that
>someone else's tradition be trashed. I don't believe you would stand for
>the same revisionism here at AMAKS. My dojo has been around for thirty
>years and many of the sempai have been training much longer than I. I would
>never dream of defying well-established traditions.
That's your problem, ain't it?
I would.
Devon Erik Oslund
"There are two types of religious belief; the notion that anything involving
the body from the neck to the knees is a sin, and the same notion applied to
the neck up. The first is merely annoying, the second scares the hell out of
me."
DevonErik
>If I wanted to read a series of old posts to which it is no longer possible
>to respond, I wouldn't be HERE now, would I?
In other words, you want to talk, not listen.
Great. Go ahead and reinvent the wheel. It's your nickel.
But, I, for one, will not be paying much attention.
Devon Erik Oslund
Matt Witherspoon
ANNE L TAYLOR wrote in message
<7eeep5$78a$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com>...
I was reading Mr. Redmond's FAQ and passed through the section that
said that a beginner should choose 'ah', 'eh', or 'oh', just to be
safe. My own kiai sounds like a very short, barking "HoH!", rather
Klingonaase. My instructor's kiai sounds like an "OY!" with a lot of
back-of-the-throat in it. One of my fellow students doesn't cut his
off, and usually sounds like he's retching - "HAAAAaaaaakkkk".
Matt W.
Anne Taylor
There is one student in our class who also growls his kiai, ending
some full seconds after everyone else's kiai has finished ringing
throughout the room. He also kiai's all by himself a lot. It's sort
of comical.
This is my first post with Free Agent. It's a great program, but
still a few bugs to work out, so I apologize if there is anything
werid about the formatting here.
Mark A Goetsch
PC Jensen <p...@eme.dk> wrote in message news:3708b85...@news.uni2.dk...
>So back to the quote you started with: If student James can't ask a
>question in English or if teacher James can't give his English-
>speaking students explanation or information in that language, James
>is a fool paying good money for his right to be a fool.
Maybe I misread something here but I don't recall this being the major
issue. I don't think anyone was talking here about all fluent-in-Japanese
Dojo's.
>As you see, terminology in itself covers only a small and trivial
>subset of the communication that is needed in a dojo. A vocabulary of
>some 3-400 phrases can be learned over a couple of years by even the
>sub-average Joe/Joan - no matter how exotic and foreign the phrases
>are. Terminologies are not languages.
But you forget to add that terminology is a critical element. It not only
communicates but imparts structure. There is a very good reason why every
activity (at least that I can think of) keeps the original terminolgy of the
activity.
You are correct that they can be learned very easily.
I doubt that it amounts to 400 phrases.
>Whether terminology should be "Japanese" or "English" has caused a
>number of heated debates in AMAKS. I suggest you consult the archive.
>The general sentiment is that terminology should be de-japanofied, but
>so far, no-one has made a serious, systematic effort to do it.
Because it is a rather difficult proposition.
The one thing that having a certain cultural identity is that it ignores the
differences that dojo's might be in different locations.
The only argument so far against common terminlogy and customs is that
certain Dojo's don't get enough visitors to make a commonality an issue.
What is not mentioned is that there are many that, on the other hand, do.
Where I train, for example, we get well over 100 visitors a year from
different countries. Most stay from 2 days to a month. It would be foolish
for us to retrain them as American's; Use our customs etc. On the other hand
they can come in, know a little of what is needed to break through the
communication barrier and train with a place that they can feel more
comfortable in.
>I will trash any tradition I find stupid or harmful. Why is it that to
>make a change, you have to think, reason, and argue, but to keep
>things the way they are, no matter how sorry a state they're in, you
>can just quip "tradition"? Bearers of tradition rarely think, reason
>or argue about it - they have adapted it because someone told them to,
>period.
To the psychologist almost all traditions are harmfull. They are always the
source of some malaise. To the socialogist traditions are in fact a valid
method of transference of mores and values. Whether the reasoning for these
values is full known is not even relevent. Tradition is what allows us to
interact with common understanding. Remember shaking hands is a very
outdated tradition who's reasons are not well known. But it serves a vital
function.
Mark
>
>>I don't believe you would stand for the same revisionism here at AMAKS.
>
>Try me/us. You obviously have very little idea of what AMAKS is.
>
>>My dojo has been around for thirty years and many of the sempai have
>>been training much longer than I. I would never dream of defying
>>well-established traditions.
>
>If you would never dream of defying well-established traditions, what
>could you possibly have to tell the rebels and misfits who built up
>this forum? AMAKS was and is the only international public forum for
>questioning and criticizing "well-established traditions" within
>Shotokan. If you came to AMAKS to muse about the wonders of tradition
>and to expose your gullibility (which you probably like to call
>"loyality" or "humility" yourself) you have made a bad choice.
Mark A Goetsch
Joel Young <jdy...@m486.young> wrote in message news:7ebdf8
>I bet the women in Anne's dojo have to sit in seizan with
>their knees together...
And there is nothing wrong with that.
Mark
Mark A Goetsch
DevonErik <devo...@aol.comnnospamm> wrote in message
>>should just go in and try to change that
>>and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH??
>
>Yep.
And further add that if you mis-pronounce one word of English or even have
any accent that is different from the instructor's that you should be thrown
out.
Mark
Mark A Goetsch
Roberto A. Alvelais <r...@jko.com> wrote in message
>This osu stuff is silly. If an instructor, any instructor, gets
>upset with someone responding to them in a polite manner but in
>English , the instructor has a terrible problem and you should leave
>immediately.
I would probably clean out your group at that rate. I hate people that say
"ya" or "whatever" or any of the other stuff that sometimes comes out.
Osu on the other hand is not silly but should be in it's place. In a social
situation outside of a dojo it is impolite. In a dojo some use it and some
don't. It depends on the mores of the Dojo.
When it is used as a polite greeting.
When I use osu it is usually in the pattern of greeting someone at the Dojo
that I have known a long time. I don't use it to answer my teacher or in a
serious context. I was at a place that had codified it quite a bit. The dojo
was about 30% Japanese and the "Osu's" constantly and loudly. I myself found
it rather amusing and somewhat distasteful, but if this is there way of
doing things then far be it for me to say differently.
Mark
ven...@webtv.net
Are you that hidebound?
"A little moderation may be in order."
That would be wise. I seriously doubt, and don't take this as a
challenge, that you want to start an AMAKS Flamewar.They are the
biggest, best, and bloodiest on the Net, and we here enjoy a unique
range of Defensive, Offensive(very) and counterroffensive armament.
For safety's sake, please check the archives.
For wisdom's sake, as well.
Or you may find out why there is a unique rite
We call The Gates Of Hell.^V^^V^^V^
So for heaven's sae be careful till you find out where you are, and who
and what youare dealing with here.At www.amaks.com we have other
resourcse in addition to the archives, such as members pages for those
having a website-I don't but others do.Much information is to be had by
visiting these,and I recommend it.
And as well, I do recommend a trip through all Thirty Seven Chambers of
Amaks.
A prepared pilgrim is a safer pilgrim.
You'll make more progress that way.
Regards, John Genjumin Vengel
PC Jensen
<no...@enteract.com> wrote:
>PC Jensen <p...@eme.dk> wrote in message news:3708b85...@news.uni2.dk...
>>As you see, terminology in itself covers only a small and trivial
>>subset of the communication that is needed in a dojo. A vocabulary of
>>some 3-400 phrases can be learned over a couple of years by even the
>>sub-average Joe/Joan - no matter how exotic and foreign the phrases
>>are. Terminologies are not languages.
>But you forget to add that terminology is a critical element. It not only
>communicates but imparts structure.
"Structure", my butt! You know as well as I do that the terminology is
inconsistent. You may not like to face it, though. Some terms are more
or less logically built from "primitive" or generic elements (such as
"gyaku"+"zuki"), others are semi-poetic, descriptive metaphors (such
as "nami-gaeshi", "mizu-nagare", or "neko-ashi"), others again (like
"sanchin-dachi" or "sochin-dachi") are non-explanatory labels or
pointers.
Don't get the idea that widespread usage does very much in terms of
standardizing or systematizing terminology. To the contrary: Once
terms are learned, most people don't give waffles about logic or
consistency (two major components of "structure", in my book).
Remember WordPerfect in the DOS versions? Those who do also remember
the disgusting command set and the steep learning curve. Once
secretaries and other good people finally learned it, however, they
would fight to keep it as if their life was at stake. They didn't give
a hoot about the structure and logic of user-friendly word processors.
They would rather keep their old command set with all its
inconsistencies, exceptions, idiosyncracies and lack of logic and
coherence.
Same thing with Japanese terminology. Those of us who have learned it
well will probably even oppose a logical and structured system, should
somebody propose one. The power and inertia of habit is awesome and
you, as usual, give in to and defend it. I don't think you have ever
stopped to analyze the terminology structure to any depth.
>There is a very good reason why every activity (at least that I can think
>of) keeps the original terminolgy of the activity.
Now, you know that your usage of "original" always gets you into
trouble. What original terminology? Chinese? Okinawan? Duh!
>You are correct that they can be learned very easily.
Agreement on a not-completely-trivial point. I'm worried. :-)
> I doubt that it amounts to 400 phrases.
You can doubt all you like. I have spent time compiling word lists and
translation tables, sorting terms into categories, formatting,
printing and distrubuting them. So have a few others in here. That is
one way to get a fairly good feel of the nature and size of the vocab.
The list I have made for our local club has some 410-20 entries.
Elmar's book (app. C) lists some 350, give or take a dozen. Counting
is harder than doubting, but give it try some time, anyway.
>>Whether terminology should be "Japanese" or "English" has caused a
>>number of heated debates in AMAKS. I suggest you consult the archive.
>>The general sentiment is that terminology should be de-japanofied, but
>>so far, no-one has made a serious, systematic effort to do it.
>Because it is a rather difficult proposition.
No, it's not really difficult, but it's a project that demands a good
amount of work. And AMAKS participants fall in two categories: Those
that are already too busy (whether in karate or in real life) - and
those that shun any project demanding an attention span longer than a
couple of minutes.
I don't know who's gonna do it, but some day, someone will. I am one
of the folks who were brought up with Japanese terminology and feel
right at home with it, but I will definitely both cheer at and make
use of a standardized English terminology with some thought behind it.
>Where I train, for example, we get well over 100 visitors a year from
>different countries. Most stay from 2 days to a month. It would be foolish
>for us to retrain them as American's; Use our customs etc. On the other hand
>they can come in, know a little of what is needed to break through the
>communication barrier and train with a place that they can feel more
>comfortable in.
Within the context of an international organization, a common
terminology makes sense, whether in English, Japanese, Swahili or
Esperanto. However, given the distribution of power, your org and
quite a few others will never even be presented with the choice! You
would probably get whupped for even raising the question. But this is
AMAKS, Mark, not your org. You tend to get it mixed up.
>I will trash any tradition I find stupid or harmful. Why is it that to
>make a change, you have to think, reason, and argue, but to keep
>things the way they are, no matter how sorry a state they're in, you
>can just quip "tradition"? Bearers of tradition rarely think, reason
>or argue about it - they have adapted it because someone told them to,
>period.
>To the psychologist almost all traditions are harmfull. They are always the
>source of some malaise.
Keep your sweeping generalizations to yourself. Don't tell me what
psychologists are like. You are a complete and utter novice there. I
have life-long personal and professional experience with a couple of
thousand psychologists, what do you have?
Let me spell it out for you if you want *qualified* generalization:
Psychologists are sticklers for tradition. They wallow in it, cherish
it, cultivate it. Believers in Freud, Jung, Skinner, Piaget, or other
school-builders behave exactly as Shotokaners believing in the Big F,
the Dojo Con and the Myth (tm) in general. Don't get me going.
>To the socialogist traditions are in fact a valid method of transference
>of mores and values. Whether the reasoning for these values is full
>known is not even relevent.
Is the tradition of using correct wovels relevent to the socialogist?
Traditions are, of course, "a valid method of transference of mores
and values". If they didn't last long enough to be transferred between
individuals, groups, or generations, it would be silly to call them
traditions, right?
"The sociologist" will, of course, have to accept that transference
often/mostly happens without transference of the reasoning behind it
(if there ever was any). If he ignored such an obvious fact, it would
be silly to call him/her a scientist, right?
Without analysis of and reasoning about tradition, however, "the
sociologist" will be hard pressed to explain why traditions change or
why conflict arises when people question each other's traditions. So
implying that "the sociologist" doesn't care would be silly, right?
Don't use these common sense observations to underpin or justify your
own reluctance to question, scrutinize or criticize tradition. A
reluctance/fear that you have demonstrated so amply in AMAKS.
You are always the loyal defender of authority and tradition, always
content to answer "Why?" with "Because that's the way it is". So what
are you doing here, where that answer is insufficient, almost by
doctrine <g>? I keep wondering. But if someone asked me to say just
one nice thing about you, I'd say: "Mark is living proof that AMAKS is
not a brainwash operation".
>Tradition is what allows us to interact with common understanding.
Dig deeper. Are natural laws "tradition"? Is the common base of
reference constituted by our senses "tradition"? Keep it concrete and
specific, Mark. Your stick's too short for them high-up bananas.
>Remember shaking hands is a very outdated tradition who's reasons
>are not well known. But it serves a vital function.
How can something that "serves a vital function" be "very outdated"?
You have to be more careful. I don't wanna waste time trying to figure
out what you mean, when you obviously don't care how you put it.
Ride over.
George Winter
(snip)
Yow! Mark Goetsch -- roadkill on the information super highway
PC Jensen
>How can something that "serves a vital function" be "very outdated"?
No jokes about your cars, your rectal sphincters, or the steel bridges
of America, please, folks. This is about tradition. :-)
George Winter
>On Wed, 07 Apr 1999 11:53:56 GMT, p...@eme.dk (PC Jensen) wrote:
>
>>How can something that "serves a vital function" be "very outdated"?
>
This sounds like a challenge..Ok here goes
The English Monarchy (I suppose the "vital" is exagerated)
The bible & any other ancient religious text
FAA Flight control (you did not specifically exclude this one :-)
James Goldman
>
> Roberto A. Alvelais <r...@jko.com> wrote in message
>
> >This osu stuff is silly. If an instructor, any instructor, gets
> >upset with someone responding to them in a polite manner but in
> >English , the instructor has a terrible problem and you should leave
> >immediately.
>
> I would probably clean out your group at that rate. I hate people that
> say "ya" or "whatever" or any of the other stuff that sometimes comes
> out.
But I would hardly call "ya" and "whatever" polite responses. Well, if
you happen to be German, then "ya" would be OK.
> I don't use it to answer my teacher or in a serious context.
That's what bothers me. At my dojo we do respond to the instructor this
way. Mind you, he's not Japanese so it's possible he doesn't know/care.
If that's the case, then I guess it doesn't matter.
James
Rose Humphrey
>
> DevonErik wrote:
>
> <<But, I, for one, will not be paying much attention.>>
>
Bad move, Anne, bad move. When you arrive in a new dojo, it is unwise
to start out by insulting one of the regulars. Devon is a spiky character, but he talks a lot of sense and we like him.
The guys are being quite friendly, patiently explaining how to present
posts, why it's a good idea to consult the archives and so on. You may find the comment about talking rather than reading easier to understand if I explain that one of the things we *don't* want AMAKS to become is a high-volume, low-content chatroom.
Freggsample, rather than all this blithering on about belts or the
umpteenth thread about (not) saying "Ossu", I would be delighted if someone could give me an insight into why manjigamae (or manji uke, if you prefer). What is it really supposed to represent? A throw? A high hikite in preparation for a downward attack with the raised arm? Grabbing a bag of sweeties and holding them out of arms' reach? Why does the Shito Ryu version have the raised fist at ear level, instead of the Shotokan "pour water down one sleeve and it should flow out the other" position?
--
Rose
** Bonsai: from little acorns, tiny oaks grow **
P. Bromaghin
>
> ANNE L TAYLOR wrote:
>
> >should just go in and try to change that
> >and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH??
>
> Yep.
>
> >that clearly states that Japanese terminology is favored? <G>
>
> Find a new dojo.
Devon, this is probably the most unreasonable position you have ever taken
in this newsgroup. To base your decision of where to train on such a
trivial issue as this is just plain stupid.
A.L.T.:
> >Seriously,
> >if this is your position I am a little surprised at the suggestion that
> >someone else's tradition be trashed. I don't believe you would stand
for
> >the same revisionism here at AMAKS.
She is correct and you know it.
A.L.T.:
>> My dojo has been around for thirty
> >years and many of the sempai have been training much longer than I.
> > I would never dream of defying well-established traditions.
There is no reason to put up with stupid stuff, but...
The operation of a dojo, be it a club or commercial, is the business of
nobody but those who run the place (the board or the owner).
Nearly all of my training has been in English. Around here, the Japanese
name for a technique is only occasionally used, so I don't even know the
names for some of those more rarely done. Last fall I spent a couple of
months out of town on business and trained at a club where they used (and
misused and mispronounced) only Japanese for technique names. Their
etiquette and command patterns were also quite different from what we use.
This was pretty disconcerting for nearly my whole time there, but I didn't
jump in and yell "YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG, YOU MORONS!"
When I taught, I did it my own way. The students, familiar only with their
own ways, didn't at first go or stop exactly when I wanted them to, but
they figured it out. We all learned a hell of a lot from each other and
had a good time doing it.
Whether or not you will learn (and enjoy learning), that is what should
make your decision, not something so arbitrary and stupid as terminology.
Joel Young
\begin{sarcasm}
Yes because women are impure and they must learn to keep
their knees together at all times, also they must not
tempt the instructor with those glimpse of crotch.
Anywise, we all know that women smell funny in the dojo
and need to keep their legs together.
\end{sarcasm}
Of course, Mark, there is nothing wrong with it--there is
nothing right either--it is stupid meaningless, sexist
crap.
Joel
jyo...@erols.com
ps. drop the n
George Winter
>In article <7eesdt$e1j$1...@eve.enteract.com>,
> "Mark A Goetsch" <no...@enteract.com> writes:
>>
>> Joel Young <jdy...@m486.young> wrote in message news:7ebdf8
>>>I bet the women in Anne's dojo have to sit in seizan with
>>>their knees together...
>>
>> And there is nothing wrong with that.
Mark says there is nothing wrong with it because in japan that is how
women kneel (traditionally :-).
Perhaps he overlooked the *have to* in the statement. I'll give him
the benefit of the doubt until he posts that enforcing japanese sexual
stereotypes are a legitimate part of karate training.
DevonErik
>DevonErik wrote:
>
><<But, I, for one, will not be paying much attention.>>
>
>ROTFL. I'm crushed.
{thick British accent}
Well, there are are...
Ah warned yew and ah warned yew, but. oh, no, it's just an 'armless little
bunny rabbit, 'innit?
{/thick British accent}
Oh, well.
DevonErik
{Mark wrote}
>>To the psychologist almost all traditions are harmfull. They are always the
>>source of some malaise.
>
>Keep your sweeping generalizations to yourself. Don't tell me what
>psychologists are like. You are a complete and utter novice there. I
>have life-long personal and professional experience with a couple of
>thousand psychologists, what do you have?
>
>Let me spell it out for you if you want *qualified* generalization:
>Psychologists are sticklers for tradition. They wallow in it, cherish
>it, cultivate it. Believers in Freud, Jung, Skinner, Piaget, or other
>school-builders behave exactly as Shotokaners believing in the Big F,
>the Dojo Con and the Myth (tm) in general. Don't get me going.
Worse yet, psychologists are as, if not more, prone to reach conclusions on
account of personal prejudice or other nonscientifically sound reasons.
Example:
DSM II: Homosexuality = paraphilia = neurosis. Sadomasochism = paraphilia =
neurosis.
DSM IV: Homosexuality =/= paraphilia =/= neurosis. Sadomaschism = paraphilia =
neurosis.
What changed? Not the degree of knowledge. We know little more about either
than we did back then. But homosexuals acquired a political lobby with some
clout.
Now, the point here is not about homosexuality. I don't know if it's learned or
genetic, a neurosis or not. But I do know that until psychology as a science
stops basing its conclusions on cultural prejudices, it will continue to be a
body of observations in search of a science.
DevonErik
>DevonErik wrote
>>
>> ANNE L TAYLOR wrote:
>>
>> >should just go in and try to change that
>> >and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH??
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>> > What if the dojo has a FAQ
>> >that clearly states that Japanese terminology is favored? <G>
>>
>> Find a new dojo.
>
>Devon, this is probably the most unreasonable position you have ever taken
>in this newsgroup.
Oh, come on, Peter. You know perfectly well that I was yanking her chain.
>To base your decision of where to train on such a
>trivial issue as this is just plain stupid.
On its face, yes. But insisting on Japanese words, or on counting in Japanese
may often be the tip that indicates an entire iceberg of hidebound illogic.
>I am a little surprised at the suggestion that
>> >someone else's tradition be trashed. I don't believe you would stand
>for
>> >the same revisionism here at AMAKS.
>
>She is correct and you know it.
No, she is failing to recognize the difference between being disagreed with and
being punished. She assumes that the latter rather than the former is what is
happening to her, mostly because she hasn't seen how we do the latter around
here.
DevonErik
>DevonErik <devo...@aol.comnnospamm> wrote in message
>
>>>should just go in and try to change that
>>>and INSIST that the participants SPEAK ENGLISH??
>>
>>Yep.
>
>And further add that if you mis-pronounce one word of English or even have
>any accent that is different from the instructor's that you should be thrown
>out.
Again with the straw men, Mark.
PC Jensen
wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Apr 1999 15:51:03 GMT, p...@eme.dk (PC Jensen) wrote:
>>On Wed, 07 Apr 1999 11:53:56 GMT, p...@eme.dk (PC Jensen) wrote:
>>>How can something that "serves a vital function" be "very outdated"?
>This sounds like a challenge..Ok here goes
>The English Monarchy (I suppose the "vital" is exagerated)
>The bible & any other ancient religious text
>FAA Flight control (you did not specifically exclude this one :-)
I can accept the first two without a problem - they definitely involve
tradition. But the third? Would you really go as far as saying that
FAA has a *tradition* of Flight control? :)
PC Jensen
wrote:
>{thick British accent}
>Well, there are are...
>Ah warned yew and ah warned yew, but. oh, no, it's just an 'armless little
>bunny rabbit, 'innit?
>{/thick British accent}
Not just any old British accent. Blimey if it ain't the spitting
auditory image of Michael Caine.
Curt Coman
<7eeep5$78a$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com>...
>ven...@webtv.net wrote:
>
><<In Okinawan and Chinese arts, and some Japanese ars as well, there
are
>actually Kiais which are certain sounds.>>
>
>No, until you and George pointed that out I didn't know that. That
is
>interesting. I always wished someone would explain how one
"chooses" the
>sound they make in a kiai. I assumed it was a personal decision.
Maybe I
>should check the archives to see if there is more information on
this. But
Anne:
I think choice of kiai often depends on what one is trying to do with
one's breath. In our dojo there is a lot of emphasis on utilizing
the muscles of the lower abdominal region, while exhaling, at the
moment of "kime," and in order to accentuate this, our instructor
will have us kiai with a "hoh" sound. For someone like me, who has a
tendency to kiai high up in the back of my throat (trying desperately
to sound like a Hong Kong action hero, I suppose), it has the effect
of forcing me to use my abdomen. The object is to move the breathing
"down" into the belly so that it can be used to maximize the striking
force of a technique. Sounds strange, but it seems to help. He's
trying to get us to breathe this way on each technique, not just when
we're doing the kiai.
As is pointed out in Rob Redmond's most excellent shotokan FAQ, it's
best to stick with "oh,", "ah," or "eh." Not only are they
non-offensive sounds, they keep the throat open and will help to
avoid shrieking.
Curt
Tom Mitchell
On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, George Winter wrote:
> Subject: Re: What exactly does "usu" mean? ^v^
>
> On Tue, 06 Apr 1999 09:59:32 -0700, ATIFFEN <ATI...@Prodigy.Net>
> wrote:
>
> >To Genjumin,
> >My remark about kiaing in Japanese was intended as humor. Observe the
> ><G>. I thought it was funny precisely because you can't kiai (or grunt,
> >or laugh, or groan) "in Japanese."
> >I have heard a few white belts actually say "kiai," ....
About a year ago a brown belt was walking out to his car after
class with a Enormous Grin on his face. So I asked....
He mentioned that one of the older black belt's Kiai sounded like
a Chinese word for shrimp.
Reminded me of all the work Exxon went to to find a name that had
no bogus bias or bad pun in the world.
PC Jensen
wrote:
>{Mark wrote}
>>>To the psychologist almost all traditions are harmfull. They are always the
>>>source of some malaise.
>>Keep your sweeping generalizations to yourself. Don't tell me what
>>psychologists are like. You are a complete and utter novice there. I
>>have life-long personal and professional experience with a couple of
>>thousand psychologists, what do you have?
>>Let me spell it out for you if you want *qualified* generalization:
>>Psychologists are sticklers for tradition. They wallow in it, cherish
>>it, cultivate it. Believers in Freud, Jung, Skinner, Piaget, or other
>>school-builders behave exactly as Shotokaners believing in the Big F,
>>the Dojo Con and the Myth (tm) in general. Don't get me going.
>Worse yet, psychologists are as, if not more, prone to reach conclusions on
>account of personal prejudice or other nonscientifically sound reasons.
I see we have another gentleman in the audience wanting to have a go
at sweeping generalizations. A Californian, you are, Sir? Oh, they're
masters at it. :-)
>Example:
>DSM II: Homosexuality = paraphilia = neurosis. Sadomasochism = paraphilia =
>neurosis.
>DSM IV: Homosexuality =/= paraphilia =/= neurosis. Sadomaschism = paraphilia =
>neurosis.
Would you care to explain to the less informed among us: What the heck
is DSM, who made it, who uses it and for what?
>What changed? Not the degree of knowledge. We know little more about either
>than we did back then.
Obviously not. Were we supposed to? :-)
>But homosexuals acquired a political lobby with some clout.
Because of that DSM thing? Not the drug traffic?
>Now, the point here is not about homosexuality. I don't know if it's learned or
>genetic, a neurosis or not. But I do know that until psychology as a science
>stops basing its conclusions on cultural prejudices, it will continue to be a
>body of observations in search of a science.
I don't know what cards you have up your sleeve when you make this
point, but I'll follow and raise with Humanities and Social Sciences.
Anything having to do with human relations, activities, societies, or
cultures will forever be stuffed with conclusions based on cultural
prejudices. The human body is probably the only thing human that can
be studied with some degree of objectivity.
No matter what math-heavy, shiney chrome methods these sciences
employ, the conclusions are interpretations of data and subject to
cultural and political (don't forget) bias and prejudice. They will
never be sciences in the same sense as the Natural Sciences. To hope
for that is to hope for a society where Reason prevails and all
cultural and political conflict has ceased to exist. It sounds real
boring to me, and I have trouble believing you're that Spocky
yourself.
Isn't it a lot more fun to muster one's prejudices and biases, values
and beliefs and fight those "scientific" conclusions that go against
one's own? That's what happens anyway these days.
Little of what the academia spews out goes unquestioned by the general
public any longer. I feel a lotter better about that than I do about
the belief in "objective" psycho- and socio-engineering.
ati...@aya.yale.edu
<ma...@mindspringnospam.com> wrote:
> In our dojo there is a lot of emphasis on utilizing
>the muscles of the lower abdominal region, while exhaling, at the
>moment of "kime,"
Is that the "ibuki?" The dojo I started in emphasized ibuki, and the
dojo I'm in now does not emphasize ibuki although we are encouraged to
use what Rob Redmond has described as out-pattern breathing.
>As is pointed out in Rob Redmond's most excellent shotokan FAQ, it's
>best to stick with "oh,", "ah," or "eh." Not only are they
>non-offensive sounds, they keep the throat open and will help to
>avoid shrieking.
I wonder if "aye" is also non-offensive. That's about what my current
kiai sounds like. I don't believe our instructor feels insulted when
someone who doesn't know Japanese inadvertently uses a Japanese word
in his or her kiai.
ati...@aya.yale.edu
>Are you that hidebound?
No, no, not at all. I just thought it would be embarrassing to show
up with a brand new, shiny kiai after all this time. But, probably
nobody would notice.
> I seriously doubt, and don't take this as a
>challenge, that you want to start an AMAKS Flamewar.
Um, that would be an extremely safe assumption.
>For safety's sake, please check the archives.
I believe I've indicated that I will happily do so. I've skimmed the
site a little -- spent some time last night on the kata section and it
was eye-opening. Very well done. Anyway, I look forward to absorbing
as much of the information as I can. Like all of you, my time is
limited.
>And as well, I do recommend a trip through all Thirty Seven Chambers of
>Amaks.
This is on my to-do list as well.
Thanks for the suggestions, John.
ptane...@my-dejanews.com
> You really misunderstood me about the FAQ, even though I tried very hard to
> make my point clearly. I have no problem whatsoever with the rules. I have
> read them carefully and I expect to do my best to follow them whenever I
> can. I respect rules... I consider rules a very small price indeed to
> pay to visit a well-organized NG.
This is the right attitude. Don't follow rules blindly, only when they
make sense. In this case, you will be rewarded with a level of dialogue
(usually) (sometimes?) (occasionally?) much higher than most places on the
Internet. There are participants with a wealth of knowledge on Shotokan
and other martial arts, so if you would like to learn more about karate, this
is it.
> What I TRIED to communicate was that, just as you
> (rightly) expect folks to follow your FAQ, so do dojos, by and large
> (rightly) expect folks to follow their traditions.
> ...
> Anne
Chin up - in my case, your attempt at communication was successful.
Yes, that was the original topic, lost in the mists of threaded history:
What's the deal on all these Japanese customs in the dojo? My view is
that the dojo is not a debating society. You're there to sweat, not yak.
Any disruption is rude and unfair, a waste of other students' time.
However, amaks is a debating society, nothing but a yakfest. This is
the appropriate forum to afflict the authorities, trammel the traditions,
maul the myths, and contradict the contradictions. Facts, logic, and data
rule. People trot out the same old tired lines over and over: "This is the
traditional way of doing things, my Sensei taught us, he's no shlockmeister,
he's truly dedicated to his art, and his teacher was a Great Master, an
initiate of the Ancient Secrets, who are you to question anything...".
They glide in like ducks, and get blasted by the amaks 20-gauge shotguns,
and the only event of interest is the squabble over the carcass.
Still, you do have one option with regard to your dojo. If their
traditions bother you, walk! It's no different than any other business or
voluntary association. And, outside of the dojo, you cerainly have the
right to discuss your complaints with other students. If enough people are
unhappy, and the management earns an unsavory reputation, they will have to
respond, or dry up. The marketplace works, when left alone, and that
includes the karate market as well.
---
Paul T.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
ati...@aya.yale.edu
wrote:
> When you arrive in a new dojo, it is unwise
>to start out by insulting one of the regulars.
I believed I had been insulted. I have a tendency to become derisive
in response to attempts to insult. Why is laughing at an insult more
offensive than the original insult?
If Devon did not intend to insult, I am sure he will let me know that
and I will heartily apologize for being wrong. I'm good at that --
I've had lots of practice.
>manjigamae (or manji uke, if you prefer).
By the sound of this, it's a block -- but I'm unfamiliar with the
term. Is this the arm-up-at-right-angles block in, for example,
bassai dai just before the pivoting down block and foot stamp? If so,
your question makes sense and I would love to hear the answer as well.
One of the most fascinating things about this NG is the emphasis on
applications. That is what it's about, isn't it, anyway . . . .
But I don't have an answer to propose. Too little experience. I'll
listen and learn on this one.
ati...@aya.yale.edu
<no...@enteract.com> wrote:
> I was at a place that had codified it quite a bit. The dojo
>was about 30% Japanese and the "Osu's" constantly and loudly.
Our dojo uses Ossu frequently as well. Since it's the only thing I'm
used to, it sounds like "normal" to me.
ati...@aya.yale.edu
wrote:
>No, she is failing to recognize the difference between being disagreed with and
>being punished. She assumes that the latter rather than the former is what is
>happening to her, mostly because she hasn't seen how we do the latter around
>here.
Not so. I haven't underestimated the folks here that badly. I
figured I was being disagreed with.
ven...@webtv.net
Rose, you have but to ask.Manjigamae in level one, throwing or torite,
is Kaiten Nage, or Aikdo Rotary throw.Hooking the opponents punch in
your rear elbow(Shoto version is like it is because Big F wasn't-five
feet tall is what he was.), you hammerfist down on muscles at back of
neck and spin opponent over into throw.
In Level Two, Tuite or Joint attack, it is the Chinese tecnhique known
as Ride the Tiger.Instead of throwing them, hook arm and hammerfist
press at shoulderjoint, locking them down.Back or cat stance here leaves
front leg for backup kick to lung one point or jianmeiling point on
pectorals to stun opponent.
In Level three, or power striking attack, it is a very different
technique, done exactly the same.Opponent swings a hook or roundhouse
punch at you,and with rear ulnar area you strike into arm points before
or at the inner elbow crook as you simultaneously down punch or
hammerfist to opponents lower abdomen , initiating the KERN strike known
as the Bladderbuster, or groin hammer, or inverted punch to close in
opponent striking down the conception vessel meridian(centerline of
abdomen).Don't hit anyone like this for real.
In Level Four, or Aiki Level, it is a katawaguruma, or Shoulder
Wheel.Upper rear hand deflects and grabs opponents wrist or sleeve as
you slide in between opps legs in deep kiba or kokutsu with lower hand
grabbing or bottomfisting the opps groin.Now smoothly pull down with
upper rear hand as you make lower hand assume upper rear position, or,
just turn in place 180 as in Jitte and switchhand positions.Kthump!
In Level Five or Weapons level,hold one kama(sickle ) blade up and to
the rear or side(rear hand) hooking opponents thrust, as you attack
groin with upturned blade of second kama.As kama enters betwee opps
legs, hook up and pull back and in with movment of hips supporting.I
guess I don't have to tell anyone that the battle is now over-in one
move.
Can you say Boy George?:-)
Regards, Vengel
Mark A Goetsch
PC Jensen <p...@eme.dk> wrote in message news:370b1d66...@news.uni2.dk...
>>But you forget to add that terminology is a critical element. It not only
>>communicates but imparts structure.
>
>"Structure", my butt! You know as well as I do that the terminology is
>inconsistent. You may not like to face it, though. Some terms are more
>or less logically built from "primitive" or generic elements (such as
>"gyaku"+"zuki"), others are semi-poetic, descriptive metaphors (such
>as "nami-gaeshi", "mizu-nagare", or "neko-ashi"), others again (like
>"sanchin-dachi" or "sochin-dachi") are non-explanatory labels or
>pointers.
"It not only communicates but imparts structure". There is no mention here
about whether the language that imparts the structure is itself structured.
When you use medical terminology are you exactly sure what every single part
of the word means and where it came from? Do you trace it's roots or in the
spirit of practicality do you instead use rote memorization to rmember the
use of the word?
>Don't get the idea that widespread usage does very much in terms of
>standardizing or systematizing terminology. To the contrary: Once
>terms are learned, most people don't give waffles about logic or
>consistency (two major components of "structure", in my book).
Widespread use is what creates standardization. Not directly of course but
over time what might be percieved at the beginning as "faddish" becomes in
fact the standard.
Systemizing the terminology can mean being consistant in usage or trying to
create a closed form language. Both in fact would be optimal. If the
language is large then of course systemizing a language makes it easier to
learn and use. For a more specialized language "rote" memorization seems to
do the job nicely.
For imposing structure in what is being said though systemization is *not* a
necessity. The English language for example has many exceptions to just
about every rule there is. While this can at times cause additional trouble
it has not prevented people from putting structure in what is said.
>Now, you know that your usage of "original" always gets you into
>trouble. What original terminology? Chinese? Okinawan? Duh!
Duh! Let's talk about the more mundane like why we use greek or latin (both
long dead languages) in many professions. Or for that matter German or
French. Or why English with all of it's headaches is becoming the defacto
language.
>I don't know who's gonna do it, but some day, someone will. I am one
>of the folks who were brought up with Japanese terminology and feel
>right at home with it, but I will definitely both cheer at and make
>use of a standardized English terminology with some thought behind it.
Develop a kludge for what has already been kludged. I have some suspicions
that the English will be much longer to say then the Japanese. I also think
that there will be some problems when it comes to making the terminology as
systematic as we would like.
History is littered with those that criticized and then failed to overcome
the same difficulties.
>Within the context of an international organization, a common
>terminology makes sense, whether in English, Japanese, Swahili or
>Esperanto.
Exactly.
> However, given the distribution of power, your org and
>quite a few others will never even be presented with the choice! You
>would probably get whupped for even raising the question. But this is
>AMAKS, Mark, not your org. You tend to get it mixed up.
The current distribution of power is not what controls the terminology. You
admitted it yourself. You grew up on the Japanese terminology. You admit
that you feel at home with it.
As to choices. I make my own. I do have some responsibility. That is to
train people in Shotokan Karate and to make sure that should they go to
another dojo they can adopt to the social mores easily. That means that -
I teach one step sparring occasionally which imho is not even remotely and
efficient method for teaching.
Some Japanese terminology so that 99% of the time my students will
understand what is being said at other dojo's.
Some formal trappings so that the structure is similar to what they might
find elsewhere.
>Let me spell it out for you if you want *qualified* generalization:
>Psychologists are sticklers for tradition. They wallow in it, cherish
>it, cultivate it. Believers in Freud, Jung, Skinner, Piaget, or other
>school-builders behave exactly as Shotokaners believing in the Big F,
>the Dojo Con and the Myth (tm) in general. Don't get me going.
Here again you miss the boat. You might indeed be correct that psychologists
are sticklers for psychological tradition. There are many that share the
same problems that they are indeed trying to cure. But we are not talking
about that.
What do psychologist look for when classifying a problem? Where did it come
from? Does it center upon how the person was brought up? Is it societies
fault? Why is it societies fault?
You really don't have to ask several thousand psycholgists about this. What
do these represent? Things like social mores. The traditions that we were
brought up over. The guilt that these traditions bring. Hmmmmmmmmm.....
>Is the tradition of using correct wovels relevent to the socialogist?
Are wovels that relevant to you?
>"The sociologist" will, of course, have to accept that transference
>often/mostly happens without transference of the reasoning behind it
>(if there ever was any). If he ignored such an obvious fact, it would
>be silly to call him/her a scientist, right?
But the reasoning is not always essential. Many times the meaning overtakes
the reasoning. The shaking of hands for instance. The reasoning was "see my
hands without any weapons in them" which really isn't something that most
even consider when shaking hands.
>Without analysis of and reasoning about tradition, however, "the
>sociologist" will be hard pressed to explain why traditions change or
>why conflict arises when people question each other's traditions. So
>implying that "the sociologist" doesn't care would be silly, right?
If people stop shaking hands tommorrow and instead decide to rub butts I
don't think that any person (but maybe a silly one?) would care that the
tradition of shaking hands started with a bunch of long dead knights. They
might wonder about the shaking of the butts but as long as the function is
preserved it really isn't any sweat off of any scientist's brow. On the
other hand if the act of greeting someone became grounds for a fight then
that would be more worthy of consideration.
>Don't use these common sense observations to underpin or justify your
>own reluctance to question, scrutinize or criticize tradition. A
>reluctance/fear that you have demonstrated so amply in AMAKS.
>You are always the loyal defender of authority and tradition, always
>content to answer "Why?" with "Because that's the way it is". So what
>are you doing here, where that answer is insufficient, almost by
>doctrine <g>? I keep wondering. But if someone asked me to say just
>one nice thing about you, I'd say: "Mark is living proof that AMAKS is
>not a brainwash operation".
That is perhaps the least common sense thing that you have said. When I put
down the primative methods that we still train in I am considered a heretic.
When on the other hand I use a few traditions to help keep some order I am
considered the "loyal defender of authority and tradition". How soon that we
forget.
The problem here is that we spend more time analysing whether we should bow
or what some long dead Okinawan used for self defense then to look at the
very way we train and say "is this the best method".
How many of you still do the same old up and down basics. Occasionally
adding a combination but for the most part the same old basics?
How many of you have taken the time to look at how kata's are created and
see how they would apply to stepping forward and creating a new kata?
How many spend night after night punching in the keyboard about some
application in some kata that even would confuse the people that
"shotokanized" the kata in the first place?
Maybe I will in time see more than a passing attempt at such things. So, I
watch and wait.
>How can something that "serves a vital function" be "very outdated"?
>You have to be more careful. I don't wanna waste time trying to figure
>out what you mean, when you obviously don't care how you put it.
Can something that "serves a vital function" be "very outdated"? Ask any
person that uses a Unix command line and see that indeed it is so.
Mark
Mark A Goetsch
DevonErik <devo...@aol.comnnospamm> wrote in message
>Again with the straw men, Mark.
No straw here my man. I didn't even aregue the point.
Paul Willoughby
wrote:
>Now, the point here is not about homosexuality. I don't know if it's learned or
>genetic, a neurosis or not. But I do know that until psychology as a science
>stops basing its conclusions on cultural prejudices, it will continue to be a
>body of observations in search of a science.
>
Don't hold your breath waiting for Psychology to become a real
science. It never has and never will be. Yes, they employ the
scientific method from time to time, experimenting with dogs and rats
and such. However, psychology will always remain a pseudo science.
Apologies to my sister and any other Psychologist who I may have
offended.
Paul
P. Bromaghin
>
> PC Jensen wrote
> >You have to be more careful.
>
> person that uses a Unix command line and see that indeed it is so.
AAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!
CHOKE!!!! SPIT!!!! GAG!!!! COUGH!!!!
Does that answer your question?
George Winter
Thank you for a very nice post.
Not to be snotty, but just to underscore the common objection to
John's pretty "levels".
Do you think it is an *accident* that manjigamae is the end position
of someone starting a gas powered lawn mower? If I can match any move
in okinawan kata to the use of a power tool, would we all accept that
this is an essential part of the kata?
Simon Slavin
p...@eme.dk (PC Jensen) wrote:
> slavins.at.hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost (Simon Slavin) wrote:
>
> >I'm having a big problem with this in my classes (I learn, not
> >teach). When I started learning Karate we counted in Japanese
> >and said 'oos' a lot. Now the counting happens in English and
> >my current teachers want 'oos' said at different times.
>
> Like, when?
Well, one of my earlier instructors expected to hear an 'oos'
whenever he told us that move to make:
"Five age-ukes forward, then mots and five uchi-ukes, mots."
"Oos."
But my current instructor doesn't expect them there. If someone
goes 'oos' he gives an enquiring look to see if there was some
problem with understanding what he has just said. Instead he
likes us to 'oos' when he's reached the end of a paragraph in
explaining something or announcing when the next lesson will be.
The earlier instructor never expected an 'oos' unless he was
actually talking about a karate move or sequence of moves. I
can cope with both uses fine, it's the next bit I have trouble
getting used to:
> >the attacker announces the attack and makes sure that the
> >defender is ready. We did this by having the defender say
> >'oos' to acknowledge 'jodan' or whatever. <... snip ...>
> >my current teacher doesn't like it.
>
> >I still think it's a good idea -- make sure your opponent did
> >hear your attack announcement.
>
> I'll admit it does a certain something for peace in the dojo, but can
> you clarify a little: Don't your teachers think it's a good idea or do
> they want you to say something else? Like, what?
My current teacher doesn't expect any acknowledgement at all.
It still makes me a little uneasy, especially with big classes
where people of different grades are using different attacks but
everyone's announcing their attack at the same time. Sometimes
it's not clear whether your opponent heard your attack.
Simon.
--
No junk email please. | What a story !
<http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk> | I can't wait to embellish it.
| -- Elaine from _Ally McBeal_
Simon Slavin
ATIFFEN <ATI...@Prodigy.Net> wrote:
> I struggled for a while trying to develop a kiai that didn't
> sound stupid to me. I wonder if other people have had the same
> challenge.
A kiai shouldn't be a word. This is a kiai:
You've just been shopping before a holiday weekend. You bought
more than you normally do and now you have to lift up three bags
-- all heavy -- and take them to the car. You bend down to pick
up the bags and tense your stomach to make picking them up easier
(it provides leverage). As you pick them up you let out some air
in a quick grunt. That's a kiai -- the release of the tension
you needed to perform the move.
If you have to use a word, try a variation on 'hai', pronounced
with a lot of tension at the 'h' bit but without any during the 'ai'.
It should fit in with the way you tense your body to perform a
tight punch. The FAQ (here we go again !) recommends 'hai' or
'he' or some similar type of variation on them.
Shawn Jefferson
wrote:
>Not to be snotty, but just to underscore the common objection to
>John's pretty "levels".
>
>Do you think it is an *accident* that manjigamae is the end position
>of someone starting a gas powered lawn mower? If I can match any move
>in okinawan kata to the use of a power tool, would we all accept that
>this is an essential part of the kata?
Ah, but George you've ignored Elmar's kata rules. There are no
'setup' moves in kata.
Thus, you would be doing a Jackie Chan type of move where you are
starting the mower and striking/blocking an opponent with the rising
arm. The mower could have a possible inclusion in the next motion.
It fits. Did they have lawns on Okinawa?
---
Shawn Jefferson
sjeffers(at)home(dot)com
PC Jensen
<no...@enteract.com> wrote:
>PC Jensen <p...@eme.dk> wrote in message news:370b1d66...@news.uni2.dk...
<snip long and boring juxtapositions of my truth and Marks - yawn>
<until Mark says:>
>As to choices. I make my own. I do have some responsibility. That is to
>train people in Shotokan Karate and to make sure that should they go to
>another dojo they can adopt to the social mores easily. That means that -
>I teach one step sparring occasionally which imho is not even remotely and
>efficient method for teaching.
>Some Japanese terminology so that 99% of the time my students will
>understand what is being said at other dojo's.
>Some formal trappings so that the structure is similar to what they might
>find elsewhere.
You say you make your own choices, then you list examples showing only
how you serve as a loyal clerk for your org. Carrying out some of your
duties, you may be cursing under your breath, but you do what is
expected from you. To me, that sounds like a choice from a one-item
menu.
<then yawn, snip>
<until Mark says>
>When I put down the primative methods that we still train in I am considered a
>heretic.
In your org or in AMAKS? Have you been considered a heretic for
putting down primitive (traditional, I take it) training methods here
in AMAKS? Sorry, Mark, that escaped me. Did anyone else notice?
> When on the other hand I use a few traditions to help keep some order
>I am considered the "loyal defender of authority and tradition". How soon that
>we forget.
It is dawning on me that you actually think of yourself as a rebel and
find it very unjust to be called "loyal defender of authority and
tradition". How late we remember.
I appreciate it that you lifted the veil a little on how you view
yourself. I have always had trouble figuring out your motives for
participating. The following statements might have helped shed more
light on this, as they seem to address your main concerns about the
AMAKS proceedings in general. A few clarifications are needed, though.
>The problem here is that we spend more time analysing whether we should bow
>or what some long dead Okinawan used for self defense then to look at the
>very way we train and say "is this the best method".
1) Are you saying that most AMAKS participants defend traditional
training methods?
2) Ad 1: how long since the last time someone did that in a post?
3) Did you miss out on threads like the one DevonErik started a couple
of months ago on the design of training?
4) Do you view the contributions to kata training (bunkai threads,
threads on various kata practicing methods) as defense of traditional
training or do they count as innovative in your book?
> How many of you still do the same old up and down basics. Occasionally
>adding a combination but for the most part the same old basics?
5) You are unclear about how this question fits into your puzzle.
6) What exactly would it prove, in your view, if the answer is that
90% af all AMAKSers still do it?
7) What exactly would it prove, in your view, if the answer is that
only 10% af all AMAKSers still do it?
8) Does "still do the same old ... etc." mean doing it 10, 20, 30
percent of the training time - where's your cut-off point - am I lost
to lameness if I do it once a year?
>How many of you have taken the time to look at how kata's are created and
>see how they would apply to stepping forward and creating a new kata?
9) Did you miss out on the numerous threads that addressed the
question of how kata are created, with heavy contributions from Elmar,
Vengel, Devon and many others?
10) Is the creation of new kata an especially attractive goal for you?
11) What would creating a new kata accomplish that researching
versions of and bunkai for existing kata does not?
>How many spend night after night punching in the keyboard about some
>application in some kata that even would confuse the people that
>"shotokanized" the kata in the first place?
12) Don't know - how many would you say?
13) Should more of us spend more time doing that - or are you
advocating we shouldn't?
14) If an application would "even confuse the people that
'shotokanized' the kata in the first place" - is that a good thing
worth striving for or a bad thing to be avoided?
>Maybe I will in time see more than a passing attempt at such things. So, I
>watch and wait.
Yeah, but for what exactly? The 14 questions above are not polemic,
but as you see, you really did leave your statements on AMAKS open to
interpretation. If you have 14 precise answers, share them. If not ...
well, your guess.