Keigo (politeness)
Chuan Sheng Lin
Japanese, Keigo is what people looking for. If you can not use proper Keigo,
your hope to be employed is very little, native or not.
Most reason cited by my college classmates in my Japanese class for studying
Japanese is job opportunity. Like business conducted in America, politeness is
very important. If you could, I highly recommend going to Japan and attending
Japanese language school there. The experience shall be just what you looking
for. I did. It was almost fun and challenging. The classes offered here in
America, or other country must meet the curriculum standards set by the
university or some. These standards force teachers to do things differently than
things you wish for.
Chuan
David Ladley
emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
Japanese kids their age. Of the fairly large handful of languages I've
worked with, Japanese is the only one where I learned how to conduct formal
business before I learned how to speak to everyday joes on the street.
My college roommate is Japanese, and he let me know early on that when he
and his friends speak to each other, there's no "-masu" or "desu". There's
rarely a "wa" or a "wo", and sentences don't end with "ka". They greet each
other with "ossu" and "oyasumi", not the longer forms, and when they part
company, it's "jyane", not "ittemairimasu". He's taught me an enourmous
amount of slang that, despite its usefulness, is seldom covered in
textbooks.
From speaking to my roommate in Japanese, I feel confident that my Japanese
is more natural and real, not stiff, formal, proper, and distant, like that
of many of my fellow students. If I ever end up teaching Japanese to native
English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
me to try this approach? Why or why not?
--
Dave Ladley ____________________
"Hey, hey, don't shine that thing in my face, man.
I'm serious. I'm serious, turn it off! Turn it off.
Okay, that's cool..." --Phish
shuji matsuda
Ladley" <lad...@panther.middlebury.edu> wrote:
>when they part company, it's "jyane", not "ittemairimasu".
'ittemairimasu' implies that the speaker comes back to the original
place.
Thus people say it to their family when they leave home, but NEVER say it
to friends etc. when they meet outside of home.
More informal form of 'ittemairimasu' should be 'ittekimasu'.
--
shuji matsuda smat...@med.keio.ac.jp
Prince Richard Kaminski
Someone once told me that the Japanese deliberately teach gaijin
unnatural Japanese so that they will be just as unable to speak the
language as the Japanese usually are to speak English, because of the
way English is taught. (I'm not trying to be offensive to Japanese
people, many of whom speak excellent English, but that is what someone
told me)
David Ladley
<36637FF4...@hotmail.com>...
> Someone once told me that the Japanese deliberately teach gaijin
> unnatural Japanese so that they will be just as unable to speak the
> language as the Japanese usually are to speak English, because of the
> way English is taught. (I'm not trying to be offensive to Japanese
> people, many of whom speak excellent English, but that is what someone
> told me)
This is exactly the pattern I'd want to break if I were a teacher of
Japanese to English speakers, or vice versa. Cultural understanding can't
occur when misinstruction of language is used to purposely hinder it. I'm a
fairly convinced believer that rough, colloquial Japanese in the classroom
is the way to go!
Hopefully if I choose the academic world, I'll meet some other teachers of
Japanese (both of Japanese and Western ethnicities), who'll support and
help me with this Promethian effort.
Dave Ladley
Sean Holland
Ladley" <lad...@panther.middlebury.edu> wrote:
>From speaking to my roommate in Japanese, I feel confident that my Japanese
>is more natural and real, not stiff, formal, proper, and distant, like that
>of many of my fellow students. If I ever end up teaching Japanese to native
>English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
>variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
>with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
>the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
>than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
>me to try this approach? Why or why not?
Well, ok. I understand what you're getting at, and to a certain extent
it's true enough. BUT....
(1) Japanese is an easy language to piss people off in.
(2) For most people, their purpose in learning Japanese is not so as to be
able to hang around in bars and argy-bargy with the boys. It is to
accomplish some purpose, usually business, in which it is best not to piss
someone off.
(3) Even if you are an "enlightened" ESL teacher, you won't start your
students off with "gonna" and "like, way cool dude" or whatever the
current argot is. You'll start them off with bottom-line stuff that they
can build on, basic structures that are not tied to social strata or
temporary slang. The same will be true of the prudent teacher of Japanese.
(4) If your room mate mocks the simple, basic Japanese you are learning,
and tells you that it isn't current, he is clearly not a language teacher,
and he is not doing you any favours.
(5) There are many good reasons to start with the -masu form, inspite of
the fact that the young Japanese exchange students you meet will not be
using that form. I have expressed my reasons for believing that the -masu
form is the primary "unmarked" form a number of times in this NG, but I
will repeat the argument if requested. I do, however, agree that most
courses in Japanese postpone the plain form of verbs too long.
(6) To sum up: If your purpose in studying Japanese is to be able to
quickly become one of the boys and hang around in the bar uttering
vulgarities and coolnesses, fine. But if your purpose is long-term, with
the aim of ultimately being proficient in the language and being able to
move up and down the scale of politeness/formality, then you just have to
be patient with the early stages. If you omit learning the "stiff, formal"
forms, then you will just be a grunting gorilla unable to manoeuvre
through the great variety of social situations. Patience, patience. That
slangy argot is actually pretty advanced stuff, and quite limited in its
real applications.
--
Sean
Due to spam filtering, mail from hotmail or prodigy will not reach me.
Scott Reynolds
> If I ever end up teaching Japanese to native
> English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
> variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
> with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
> the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
> than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
> me to try this approach? Why or why not?
There are several reasons why the more polite forms are taught first.
First, the only people who use the "plain" form of speech all the time
are young children. This means that if you always use the "plain" form
you will sound like a baby. Second, the different politeness levels in
Japanese are an integral part of that language. They are not optional
"frills" tacked on by someone who just wanted to make life difficult for
people learning Japanese as a second language. They carry meaning --
sometimes a very important part of the meaning of what one says. It is
therefore not really feasible to ignore them completely. The best that
one can do is to teach all of the politeness levels (from plain to very
polite/humble) and also the situations in which each is appropriate.
So I think the question really boils down to: Why should the desu/masu
form (which might be called "neutral polite") be taught first, rather
than the plain or more polite/humble forms? I think the answer is that
this is the most practical for an adult learner of Japanese to start
with. The "neutral polite" form is suitable for talking to strangers and
new acquaintances, as well as people you are on rather formal terms
with, such as teachers and business associates. You are correct that it
is not the form that close friends and college roommates would use with
each other, but it is a good compromise nevertheless. After all, your
roommate is not likely to be offended by you speaking to him using the
masu/desu form. But if you used that form to a stranger you were asking
directions from or to a business associate, for example, you would come
across as either rude or stupid.
_______________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@gol.com
Scott Reynolds
> I'm a
> fairly convinced believer that rough, colloquial Japanese in the classroom
> is the way to go!
Are you saying that you would omit polite language altogether, or that
you would teach the plain form first and the polite/humble forms later?
_______________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@gol.com
Charles M Richmond
>
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
> utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
> Japanese kids their age. Of the fairly large handful of languages I've
> worked with, Japanese is the only one where I learned how to conduct formal
> business before I learned how to speak to everyday joes on the street.
>
> My college roommate is Japanese, and he let me know early on that when he
> and his friends speak to each other, there's no "-masu" or "desu". There's
> rarely a "wa" or a "wo", and sentences don't end with "ka". They greet each
> other with "ossu" and "oyasumi", not the longer forms, and when they part
> company, it's "jyane", not "ittemairimasu". He's taught me an enourmous
> amount of slang that, despite its usefulness, is seldom covered in
> textbooks.
>
> is more natural and real, not stiff, formal, proper, and distant, like that
> English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
> variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
> with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
> the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
> than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
> me to try this approach? Why or why not?
>
Have you thought about the dangers of your concept. All of the Japanese
were taught the polite forms in class and in use. They also learned the
informal forms in class and the slang forms with dropped ha/wo/ka/etc
in casual conversation. It is unlikely that the slang forms were taught
in class. If you have students learn the informal and the formal forms
then that is fine, but if the practice of the informal detracts from
the practice of the formal forms then your students are going to be
socially embarrassed and are going to offend people by accident in
potentially important situations. The reason that the courses teach
the polite form is because you need to be fluent before you can really
learn the informal forms and the correct times to switch automatically.
The penalty of greeting a potential employer with, "Yo Mama. Hows it
hanging" is much higher than the penalty of greeting a new drinking
buddy with, "It is my pleasure to meet you again."
Just my thoughts
Charlie
--
***********************************************************************
* Charles Richmond Integrated International Systems Corporation *
* c...@iisc.com c...@koibito.iisc.com c...@shore.net *
* UNIX Internals, I18N, L10N, X, Realtime Imaging, and Custom S/W *
* One Longfellow Place Suite 3309 , Boston , Ma. USA 02114-2431 *
* (617) 723 7695 (617) 367 3151 FAX (617) 723 6861 *
***********************************************************************
Chuck Douglas
[edit]
>From speaking to my roommate in Japanese, I feel confident that my Japanese
>is more natural and real, not stiff, formal, proper, and distant, like that
>of many of my fellow students. If I ever end up teaching Japanese to native
>English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
>variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
>with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
>the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
>than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
>me to try this approach? Why or why not?
Learn the -masu endings. Learn how to use them and in what sort of
situations you should use them. Why? They are FAR more important
to your *initial* introduction to people that the more abrupt form.
Remember, first impressions are the most important. If you start
speaking with dictionary form, you are going to come across as
either overly friendly or as a complete prick. Not good. And if
anyone tells you that Japanese "never" use -masu forms, they are full
of it. It is the "minimum" level of politeness that is required
for daily living. Sure, between friends on one's "in group," dictionary
form is more common but when dealing with everyone else, you should
use -masu forms.
That does NOT mean you should use all the *extremely* fancy keigo
like "irrasharimsu" or "maerimasu" etc (althought they DO have a VERY
important role to play at times) all the time. That can be just
a little too over the top at times.
Besides, the Emporer uses -masu form. If it is good enough for him,
it is good enough for me. :-)
Granted I need a bit more practise on being consistent with it.
I keep switching when I shouldn't.
--
Chuck Douglas -- chuc...@jaka.ece.uiuc.edu
"I don't pretend I have all the answers/Just the obvious ones"
--_Backbone_ by Baby Animals
Homepage down until further notice.
shuji matsuda
chuc...@jaka.ece.uiuc.edu (Chuck Douglas) wrote:
>And if
>anyone tells you that Japanese "never" use -masu forms, they are full
>of it. It is the "minimum" level of politeness that is required
>for daily living. Sure, between friends on one's "in group," dictionary
>form is more common but when dealing with everyone else, you should
>use -masu forms.
You are right.
When Japanese talk to a stranger, they use -masu forms.
-masu form is the neutral form, so it is relatively safe.
That is why you should always use -masu form, until you clearly
understand your situation. When a gaijin and stranger
speaks in an impolite form, they instantly become 'henna gaijin',
yes, 'a strange gaijin'.
Another important thing is that the coarser versions of Japanese are
extremely situation (or group) specific. There are so many ways that
the situation-specific speech can never be guaranteed effective
in all conversions in Japanese, whereas -masu form is universal.
For example, I speak Osaka dialect of Japanese. Probably it is not
your 'dictionary form', it is different from what the original poster
has learned from the room mate, but is the most familiar form of
Japanese to me. Instead, Tokyo area dialect sounds quite foreign to me.
Then, what happens if I find somebody safe to talk with in Tokyo area?
I switch from -masu form to Osaka dialect, and they use Tokyo dialect.
The coarser versions of Japanese defines which group you belong to.
So, choose what group you would like to belong to, before you start
using the group-specific Japanese.
>That does NOT mean you should use all the *extremely* fancy keigo
>like "irrasharimsu" or "maerimasu" etc (althought they DO have a VERY
************ *********
irrashaimasu mairimasu
>important role to play at times) all the time. That can be just
>a little too over the top at times.
True.
>Besides, the Emporer uses -masu form. If it is good enough for him,
>it is good enough for me. :-)
Yes.
As I wrote above, because -masu form is neutral, he uses it.
In my opinion, he knows that he should be politically very neutral in
Japan.
--
shuji matsuda smat...@med.keio.ac.jp
Donzaemon
>
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
> utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
> Japanese kids their age. Of the fairly large handful of languages I've
> worked with, Japanese is the only one where I learned how to conduct formal
> business before I learned how to speak to everyday joes on the street.
>
> My college roommate is Japanese, and he let me know early on that when he
> and his friends speak to each other, there's no "-masu" or "desu". There's
> rarely a "wa" or a "wo", and sentences don't end with "ka". They greet each
> other with "ossu" and "oyasumi", not the longer forms, and when they part
> company, it's "jyane", not "ittemairimasu". He's taught me an enourmous
> amount of slang that, despite its usefulness, is seldom covered in
> textbooks.
>
> is more natural and real, not stiff, formal, proper, and distant, like that
> of many of my fellow students. If I ever end up teaching Japanese to native
> English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
> variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
> with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
> the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
> than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
> me to try this approach? Why or why not?
It's simple. You should learn both. What will happen is because you have
some
young Japanese friends you will learn to talk like them first and when
you
get better and better and also older and older you will go back to the
keigo etc. but as far as which on you use it really depends on who you
are talking to. You probably don't want to talk the way you talk with
your
friends to people who you don't know and especially not to clients etc.
It makes sense that they teach you to speak polite first in school but
you don't want to talk that way to your friends either. They will think
it is strange.
Tony Padgett
>
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
> utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
> Japanese kids their age. Of the fairly large handful of languages I've
> worked with, Japanese is the only one where I learned how to conduct formal
> business before I learned how to speak to everyday joes on the street.
So, where does one start? I personally learned the neutral "masu" form
which is the best place to start. Then I moved to "keigo" and "son
keigo". Where do we start? In the ruff and be blamed for being harsh?
Maybe the other person speaking Japanese is speaking informal Japanese,
but there is just too much of a risk to teach this to 'gaijin'. Why not
err on the polite side?
--------
Tony Padgett
int...@gol.com
http://www2.gol.com/users/intranz/
Tony Padgett
> This is exactly the pattern I'd want to break if I were a teacher of
> Japanese to English speakers, or vice versa. Cultural understanding can't
> occur when misinstruction of language is used to purposely hinder it. I'm a
> fairly convinced believer that rough, colloquial Japanese in the classroom
> is the way to go!
>
Mmmm. Well, I'd say that there is way too much importance of how you
handle politeness in Japanese than in English. Westerners tend to be
more relaxed and emphasize being more informal. Japanese stresses more
importance on these formalities out of respect and this is the important point.
If I go up to a stranger where I say, "Eki doko?", this can give me the
answer, but the other person, to whom I'm trying to ask a favor, can
become somewhat offensive SINCE I'm asking a favor. This could be
interpretted as, "Hey, bud, where's da' station?" Does this sound
inviting? In need of help? Again, why not err on the safe side?
muchan
> Someone once told me that the Japanese deliberately teach gaijin
> unnatural Japanese so that they will be just as unable to speak the
> language as the Japanese usually are to speak English, because of the
> way English is taught. (I'm not trying to be offensive to Japanese
> people, many of whom speak excellent English, but that is what someone
> told me)
I think the reason is contrary. Japanese teachers fear, that their students
learn "not enough polite" form as a standard, and use it to Japanese people
in the situation where very polite speech is expected. "Overpoliteness"
can cause unnaturalness, but it's "safer".
My opinion is to teach "gramatically the most essential thing" first,
paralleled with proper polite speech. It won;t make the "wall" the students
face, when they have to make natural compound sentences, later.
muchan
muchan
> Yes.
> As I wrote above, because -masu form is neutral, he uses it.
> In my opinion, he knows that he should be politically very neutral in
> Japan.
> --
> shuji matsuda smat...@med.keio.ac.jp
I understand what he wants to say, but here "neutral" is incorrect.
If it add 'politeness', it is already not neutral (grammatically).
It's 'accepted as normal in usual context". yes.
( I remember the hot debate if "suru" form is "blunt" or "plain".
Those who think "-masu" form as neutral, thinks it "blunt".
By I say they are gramatically "plain'... politeness is not neutral.)
muchan
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <36638156...@gol.com>, Scott Reynolds <s...@gol.com> wrote:
>There are several reasons why the more polite forms are taught first.
>First, the only people who use the "plain" form of speech all the time
>are young children. This means that if you always use the "plain" form
>you will sound like a baby. Second, the different politeness levels in
>Japanese are an integral part of that language. They are not optional
>"frills" tacked on by someone who just wanted to make life difficult for
>people learning Japanese as a second language. They carry meaning --
>sometimes a very important part of the meaning of what one says. It is
>therefore not really feasible to ignore them completely. The best that
>one can do is to teach all of the politeness levels (from plain to very
>polite/humble) and also the situations in which each is appropriate.
Both of your points are true - but I think mask a problem that is best
pointed out in the form of a question:
Q. *WHY* do young children learn the plain forms first?
A. Because they are the root forms. The more polite forms are
formed *from* them.
In teaching *ONLY* the -masu forms first (which is what most programs
do) and deferring the plain forms until sometimes *years* later, it is
as if you attempted to teach English by teaching *only* the
conjugated forms - and neglected to teach the root forms. Thus you
taught 'running' and 'ran', but never taught 'run': The
*ONLY* form a learner can use to find the word in a dictionary.
This adds considerable burden to the learner's task. I can easily
*start* with the root form of a verb and determine the -masu form.
It is damn near impossible to *start* with the -masu form and reliably
determine the root form in many cases - there are often multiple
possibilities. I am sometimes left reading a couple of dozen
dictionary definitions to find the one that *contextually* might
fit.
So rather than teach the formation rules, you end up with raw
memorization and closely related words relationships to each
other are obscured. It was *years* between the time I learned the
- -masu form of some very common words and the time when I realized
their root plain form (which promptly tied together several up until
then _unrelated as far as I knew_ words).
IMHO, the plain forms should be taught in parallel with the -masu
forms. Yes - there is the danger that plain forms will be used
in inappropriate situations. However, that risk is outweighed by
the formidable barrier teaching only the -masu forms presents to
obtaining any substantive fluency in the language at all.
Benjamin Franz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBNmQVR+jpikN3V52xAQEApgP+PlSPeEtBpx3wO6QF+l+igRpIYfjg7IZ6
PL18Q3ZuqEdX/gdOcRDtpczPPJIerwlqzh1tiT6XKtkctE3iyQbTmJN/MoVWwB92
Xrx7ZPES6hyqdSQUSjtaL1KwVRggbPkLB69MMDNUFPpn4JmIWRrsEKXpzYHeicMk
rSWJnQVpDxs=
=KoXD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Prince Richard Kaminski
> >is more natural and real, not stiff, formal, proper, and distant, like that
> >of many of my fellow students. If I ever end up teaching Japanese to native
> >English speakers, I want to emphasize this simpler, coarser, more natural
> >variety of speech. After all, one learns a language in order to interact
> >with people and form bonds, and if learners are not being taught to speak
> >the way people in that country really speak, this is a hindrance, rather
> >than a help, to making friends of ones' peers there. Does anyone encourage
> >me to try this approach? Why or why not?
>
> situations you should use them. Why? They are FAR more important
> to your *initial* introduction to people that the more abrupt form.
>
> Remember, first impressions are the most important. If you start
> speaking with dictionary form, you are going to come across as
> anyone tells you that Japanese "never" use -masu forms, they are full
> of it. It is the "minimum" level of politeness that is required
> for daily living. Sure, between friends on one's "in group," dictionary
> form is more common but when dealing with everyone else, you should
> use -masu forms.
Well, the arguments people have been putting forward in favour of
learning the polite forms first are very convincing, and have been made
very well. But my natural inclination is to agree with David.
For instance, a Japanese friend of mine who works in a foreign company
in Tokyo with (amongst others) a Chinese man and an American, says that
the American always uses the "-masu" form too much, whereas the Chinese
man doesn't use it enough. The first sounds very unnatural, whereas the
second sounds rude, although of course, both are excused because they
are foreigners.
Now of course, it is better to sound unnatural rather than rude, but
it's a question of knowing the right degree of polite language to use. I
always go by the theory that it's better to learn a language the same
way native speakers learn it. Normal language first, and the polite
stuff later (or at the same time, but taking a secondary place).
So my basic point is perhaps somewhere in between the two extremes, but
with the emphasis on natural language first, and politeness second, but
all the time with the students being made aware that politeness is a
vital component of the language.
I think all non-native speakers of a language want to sound natural.
Over emphasis on the polite forms in Japanese can stop this ever
happening. Once learners get these polite forms drilled into their
heads, it can be difficult for them to use anything else.
lisa
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
> utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
> Japanese kids their age.
It's just my opinion, but I've found that I've gotten further in life by
learning the polite/formal way of speaking or doing things first.
Paradox: maybe we need to devote more time to teach formal English to
the supposed native speakers in our classrooms as well.
I learned the formal Tokyo dialect of Japanese, and didn't come near the
informal until a college level course. The knowledge of the formal made
learning the informal very easy. It's always safer to be too polite than
to be too familiar...
lisa
--
The teacher is like the candle which lights others
in consuming itself. - Giovanni Ruffini (1807-1881)
homepage: http://welcome.to/lisapoet
lisa
early age, because it has become the language of commerce. I have noted
that as far as groups picking up second languages go, Japanese learning
English are probably the most successful (my opinion). Perhaps it has to
do with the high pressure to excel.
lisa
Prince Richard Kaminski wrote:
> Someone once told me that the Japanese deliberately teach gaijin
> unnatural Japanese so that they will be just as unable to speak the
> language as the Japanese usually are to speak English, because of the
> way English is taught. (I'm not trying to be offensive to Japanese
> people, many of whom speak excellent English, but that is what someone
> told me)
--
lisa
> My experience is that when I applied a job which required person speaking
> Japanese, Keigo is what people looking for. If you can not use proper Keigo,
> your hope to be employed is very little, native or not.
Good point. Isn't this true no matter what language you speak? If you
can't use a "polite" standard form of the language, you probably won't
get hired anywhere... McDonald's maybe.
lisa
> If I go up to a stranger where I say, "Eki doko?", this can give me the
> answer, but the other person, to whom I'm trying to ask a favor, can
> become somewhat offensive SINCE I'm asking a favor. This could be
> interpretted as, "Hey, bud, where's da' station?" Does this sound
> inviting? In need of help? Again, why not err on the safe side?
I agree! Actually, your blunt question literally translates as "Train
where?" and you might even get laughed at... I suppose I'm old school,
but I'd opt for: Ano sumimasen ga... eki wa doko desu ka? BTDTGTTSSTV
(been there, done that, got the t-shirt, seen the video) But then again,
I still remember the full 3-sentence New Year's greating <chuckle>
Ganbatte kudasai!
lisa
lisa
> This is exactly the pattern I'd want to break if I were a teacher of
> Japanese to English speakers, or vice versa. Cultural understanding can't
> occur when misinstruction of language is used to purposely hinder it. I'm a
> fairly convinced believer that rough, colloquial Japanese in the classroom
> is the way to go!
Shall we also abandon teaching Standardized English? Maybe the whole
Nation should switch to Ebonics, or the Creole spoken in New Orleans, or
the "Pidjin English" spoken in Hawaii, or some varient spoken by the
remotest group of Amish folk we can find...
Point is that Japanese is spoken on three basic levels that reflect a
certain amount of social status and respect. Most schools start the
students with the middle level... -masu form. From there it is much
easier to transition to the higher or lower form. It's all relative to
the social structure. You might use the familiar form with close friends
or subordinants, but you'd probably want to use the -masu form with
co-workers or in public, semi-formal situations, and definatly use the
higher form with your parents, bosses, etc.
> Hopefully if I choose the academic world, I'll meet some other teachers of
> Japanese (both of Japanese and Western ethnicities), who'll support and
> help me with this Promethian effort.
I don't think you'll find anyone to support the downfall of respect.
Good luck.
lisa
> Really? Would you send a few of them to my school? Perhaps you could send
> them out across the country.
Can't do it. Most of them live in Hawaii, and I am currently
impoverished in Tucson.
> Most teachers are under the impression that,
> despite 6 years (8 or more if they go to a post-secondary institution) of
> learning in the public school system (starting at 12/13 but I don't know
> what you consider "an early age"), most of them are surprisingly weak in the
> area of communication.
Well then, "most teachers" are either blinded by bias against foreign
accents, or they are just flat out wrong... and yes, potentially
racist... in the broadest possible definition... or at least a tad
xenophobic.
MHO
lisa
> Really? Would you send a few of them to my school? Perhaps you could send
> them out across the country.
Can't do it. Most of them live in Hawaii, and I am currently
impoverished in Tucson.
> Most teachers are under the impression that,
> despite 6 years (8 or more if they go to a post-secondary institution) of
> learning in the public school system (starting at 12/13 but I don't know
> what you consider "an early age"), most of them are surprisingly weak in the
> area of communication.
Well then, "most teachers" are either blinded by bias against foreign
accents, or they are just flat out wrong... and yes, potentially
racist... in the broasest possible definition... or at least a tad
lisa
> Not in Japan, the people working at the counter speak very formally to
> customers, even if everything they say is memorized from the same manual.
Excellent point! thanks...
Anthony J. Bryant
>
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
> utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
> worked with, Japanese is the only one where I learned how to conduct formal
> business before I learned how to speak to everyday joes on the street.
I disagree. There is always a need for polite conversation. It's better
to develop the habit of speaking politely, so that you don't slip at the
wrong moment. For the record, with "everyday Joes on the street" you'd
use polite speech, since they're not on your in-group.
I do agree that language programs should teach more on common speech,
but they usually do get around to it. For the
Tony
Anthony J. Bryant
>
> Tony Padgett wrote:
> > If I go up to a stranger where I say, "Eki doko?", this can give me the
> > answer, but the other person, to whom I'm trying to ask a favor, can
> > become somewhat offensive SINCE I'm asking a favor. This could be
> > interpretted as, "Hey, bud, where's da' station?" Does this sound
> > inviting? In need of help? Again, why not err on the safe side?
>
> I agree! Actually, your blunt question literally translates as "Train
> where?" and you might even get laughed at...
OTOH, it *is* a perfectly acceptable and very informal way of asking. It
may sound funny to you, but I've heard it a million times.
Tony
Ian David Garlick
>
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped,
I think the key isn't in which you learn first or how you learn
Japanese, it's in doing it systematically and thoroughly. While
you may use plain speech a lot, to many people you will sound
rude and if I may be so bold just like a gaijin.
It is important to remember that even if you have a fall understanding
of plain speech not everyone you speak to will use it and you may
find yourself scratching your head. As difficult as keigo is, if
you walk into a shop you're going to hear it and if you don't understand
it, you're toast.
Ian D.G.
Jason Cormier
lisa wrote in message <36646E...@gci-net.com>...
>I'm trying not to chuckle... most Japanese citizens learn English at an
>early age, because it has become the language of commerce. I have noted
>that as far as groups picking up second languages go, Japanese learning
>English are probably the most successful (my opinion). Perhaps it has to
>do with the high pressure to excel.
Really? Would you send a few of them to my school? Perhaps you could send
them out across the country. Most teachers are under the impression that,
despite 6 years (8 or more if they go to a post-secondary institution) of
learning in the public school system (starting at 12/13 but I don't know
what you consider "an early age"), most of them are surprisingly weak in the
area of communication.
--
Jason Cormier
Hisai, Japan
Remove my pants to reply.
Tokyo...@hotmail.com
ilike...@mindless.com wrote:
> Chuan Sheng Lin wrote:
> > My experience is that when I applied a job which required person speaking
> > Japanese, Keigo is what people looking for. If you can not use proper Keigo,
> > your hope to be employed is very little, native or not.
>
> Good point. Isn't this true no matter what language you speak? If you
> can't use a "polite" standard form of the language, you probably won't
> get hired anywhere... McDonald's maybe.
>
Not in Japan, the people working at the counter speak very formally to
customers, even if everything they say is memorized from the same manual.
TP
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Tokyo...@hotmail.com
muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
> Prince Richard Kaminski wrote:
>
> > Someone once told me that the Japanese deliberately teach gaijin
> > unnatural Japanese so that they will be just as unable to speak the
> > language as the Japanese usually are to speak English, because of the
> > way English is taught. (I'm not trying to be offensive to Japanese
> > people, many of whom speak excellent English, but that is what someone
>
Thanks for making my day! I called up my Japanese friend who runs a Japanese
school for foreigners and we laughed and laughed until tears ran down my
cheeks. We kept trying to picture this giant (government-run?) conspiracy to
thwart gaijins from learning to speak the real language, and only to babble
in some sort of baby/gaijin talk. It's so effective no gaijins speak
colloquial Japanese. Dave Spector and these other foreigner "talents" must
really be natives who's have surgery! From now on, every time I see my friend
I'm blaming him personally for all the mistakes I make.
>
> I think the reason is contrary. Japanese teachers fear, that their students
> learn "not enough polite" form as a standard, and use it to Japanese people
> in the situation where very polite speech is expected. "Overpoliteness"
> can cause unnaturalness, but it's "safer".
>
On the serious side, I have to agree. Many, if not most, native Japanese
teachers don't seem to realize that colloquial language must be taught in
addition to "correct" langual. For example, I had a teacher correct my
"shiteru" into "shite iru" even in informal language practice. Silly. I've
seen English texts which show ESL students how to make the "I wanna go"
forms, so this concept must be recognised more in teaching ESL.
> My opinion is to teach "gramatically the most essential thing" first,
> paralleled with proper polite speech. It won;t make the "wall" the students
> face, when they have to make natural compound sentences, later.
>
> muchan
>
That's how I learned Japanese, and I thought it was very effective. Since
most of my communication was in desu/masu, I learned that best, but I
memorized the plain / dictionary forms when I was studying, so it wasn't hard
to switch when I started hanging out with friends.
Jim Breen
>I'm trying not to chuckle... most Japanese citizens learn English at an
>early age, because it has become the language of commerce. I have noted
>that as far as groups picking up second languages go, Japanese learning
>English are probably the most successful (my opinion). Perhaps it has to
>do with the high pressure to excel.
This had me and my family practically wetting ourselves with laughter.
Have you never been to Europe? Have you ever sampled the English speaking
skills of large proportions of the German population? Singapore
population? etc. etc. etc.
Many people study English in Japan, but the average
speaking/reading/writing level is *far* below that of, for example, almost
every western European country. Crikey, we have lived and worked in both
Japan & France, and on the whole, despite rather strong xenophobic &
anglophobic attitudes, English is spoken much better in France than in
Japan.
Perhaps you have interacted with a small self-selected group of motivated
Japanese. I'm not saying this is a trait of the Japanese themselves; just
an artifact of the generally awfull way English is taught in Japanese
schools.
--
Jim Breen School of Computer Science & Software Engineering
Email: j.b...@csse.monash.edu.au Monash University
http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/ Clayton VIC 3168 Australia
P: +61 3 9905 3298 F: 9905 3574 ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学
Jason Cormier
lisa wrote in message <36647E...@gci-net.com>...
>Jason Cormier wrote:
>> Really? Would you send a few of them to my school? Perhaps you could send
>> them out across the country.
>
>impoverished in Tucson.
>
>> despite 6 years (8 or more if they go to a post-secondary institution) of
>> learning in the public school system (starting at 12/13 but I don't know
>> what you consider "an early age"), most of them are surprisingly weak in
the
>> area of communication.
>
>accents, or they are just flat out wrong... and yes, potentially
>racist... in the broasest possible definition... or at least a tad
>xenophobic.
Wow, so many labels...so many misconceptions. I never would have believed
that so many racist xenophobes are living in Japan, teaching Japanese
people. You do realise that I'm talking about teachers *in Japan*, don't
you?
No, you are the one who seems to be letting their bias/experiences colour
this debate. Don't confuse long-term homestead students in the USA with the
vast majority of Japanese English-language learners who never leave the
country for more than short (non-study) trips abroad. These students get as
many hours of English language education as students in Continental Europe,
Quebec, etc. Yet, they are far behind in their communication skills. The
blame lies in the goals of English-language education here. It is not to
facilitate communication, it is to pass the entrance exams (which emphasise
grammar memorisation and translation) for high school and university.
As long as the current philosophy of English education remains, Japanese
students will remain handicapped by the system; no matter how "motivated"
(another stereotype with which I would take issue) they may be.
--
Jason Cormier
Hisai, Japan
Remove my pants to reply.
(Please note the location in the sig)
Scott Reynolds
> In teaching *ONLY* the -masu forms first (which is what most programs
> do) and deferring the plain forms until sometimes *years* later, it is
> as if you attempted to teach English by teaching *only* the
> conjugated forms - and neglected to teach the root forms. Thus you
> taught 'running' and 'ran', but never taught 'run': The
> *ONLY* form a learner can use to find the word in a dictionary.
I can't imagine a Japanese language course deferring the plain forms for
years. You need to know the plain forms to be able to form relative
clauses and to modify nouns. It is simply not possible to delay teaching
them as long as you claim some courses do.
As for what is taught in the first few weeks, I think it makes little
sense to make a big deal about some particular feature of the language
not having been covered yet. There is only a certain amount of time
available, and it is necessary to be selective.
I think we would agree, however, that once the plain forms are
introduced (as part of teaching relative clauses, etc.), the plain
*style* of speech should be taught alongside the desu/masu style. It is
the plain *style* of speech that is often delayed longer than it needs
to be, and this can cause frustration for many learners.
_______________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@gol.com
Scott Reynolds
> I find keigo to be pretty useless, unless you're talking to school
> officials, or 50+ old ladies who love to ham it up.
I find keigo to be pretty essential when talking to clients.
_______________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@gol.com
Charles Eicher
In article <3664E270...@gol.com>, Scott Reynolds <s...@gol.com> wrote:
> Snowhare wrote:
>
> > In teaching *ONLY* the -masu forms first (which is what most programs
> > do) and deferring the plain forms until sometimes *years* later, it is
> > as if you attempted to teach English by teaching *only* the
> > conjugated forms - and neglected to teach the root forms. Thus you
> > taught 'running' and 'ran', but never taught 'run': The
> > *ONLY* form a learner can use to find the word in a dictionary.
>
> I can't imagine a Japanese language course deferring the plain forms for
> years. You need to know the plain forms to be able to form relative
> clauses and to modify nouns. It is simply not possible to delay teaching
> them as long as you claim some courses do.
I decided to check and see what my own 1st year textbooks said. In the
first 3 lessons, it doesn't get much further than "kore wa nan desu ka.
sore wa enpitsu desu".. It introduces imasu and arimasu in lesson 2 without
mentioning iru or aru. Then in lesson 4 (about 6 weeks into the course at
best) it starts introducing "dictionary forms" (starting with iru and aru)
along with conjugating verbs in past tense. Shortly thereafter, it bases
"-te form" on the dictionary form.
I distinctly recall that we were told not to worry about USING the plain
form until much later, when we learned about noun-modifying forms. But this
doesn't mean that the forms were not taught. I recall spending a LOT of
time in verbal drills where the teacher would speak the dictionary form and
we'd have to conjugate it into other forms. And this is all in first year,
when we'd barely conquered kana.
It would be totally impossible to learn even the most basic verb structures
without teaching the plain forms.
> As for what is taught in the first few weeks, I think it makes little
> sense to make a big deal about some particular feature of the language
> not having been covered yet. There is only a certain amount of time
> available, and it is necessary to be selective.
I think I'd go a bit farther than that. IMHO, it really doesn't matter one
darn bit what they teach you within the first TWO YEARS of Japanese
classes. Its all so hit-and-miss and you have so little vocabulary and
grammar up to that point, that you're not going to attain a very high level
of proficiency. At that level, it is very hard to judge the appropriateness
of one's speech forms, when you're still trying to stutter out a few
hard-to-remember sentences.
> I think we would agree, however, that once the plain forms are
> introduced (as part of teaching relative clauses, etc.), the plain
> *style* of speech should be taught alongside the desu/masu style. It is
> the plain *style* of speech that is often delayed longer than it needs
> to be, and this can cause frustration for many learners.
IMHO, no, this is not important for beginners. Politeness levels are one of
the most difficult parts of the language. Its a more advanced topic, and
until you have a fairly significant command of the basics, you're not
really able to judge the quality of your own utterances. In any case,
Japanese isn't some system of words and grammar that lives in a book, its a
living language. The REAL learning starts when you get into a real Japanese
language environment. In that environment, you have a natural tendency to
emulate the speech patterns you hear most frequently, and that is most
likely to be plain-form speech. If you never learned one word of common
plain-form speech, you would rapidly pick it up from your friends and
associates. This is a phenomenon known as "mirroring." However, without
some serious book-learning of politeness levels, you are likely to make
serious mistakes when mirroring. For example, if your Japanese boss speaks
down to you in abrupt, blunt speech forms, you would offend if you
responded in a similar speech pattern. You've got to know your keigo, the
different levels of politeness, and their proper application.
----------------
Charles Eicher
cei...@inav.net
----------------
jre...@my-dejanews.com
> As long as the current philosophy of English education remains, Japanese
> students will remain handicapped by the system; no matter how "motivated"
> (another stereotype with which I would take issue) they may be.
Agreed. The underlying assumptions and objectives of any language teaching
regime, be it Monbushou or the Japanese-text-book-industry, will have profound
effects on the outcome.
Different learners have different objectives, some of the more common ones
are: 1) satisfy curiosity 2) intellectual stimulation 3) survival 4) ability
to interact with a specific group (eg colleagues, family, friends) 5) ability
to interact generally 6) full communication ability 7) native speaker level
(Personally, I'm aiming for (6) within ten years and (7) within fifty.)
Anyway, '-masu' etc does just fine for (1) and (2) and is arguably easier
than learning the conjugations of the various verb groups. The really
curious may want to learn both, but will probably find it easier to start
with '-masu' etc.
For (3) '-masu' is both simpler and safer
(4) will depend on the group. And here I agree with the initial post - There
should be ways of learning Japanese starting with the plain form. More about
that in a moment.
For (5) thru (7) learners will need to learn all forms. Question is - what is
the best order? I'll give some thoughts in a moment.
First, I really think that textbooks/courses should be really up front and
specific about exactly what kind of learner they are targeting, and then come
up with an approach that suits that kind of learner.
Also, I think that students should get exposure to a wide range of language
styles from a very early stage, including examples of inappropriate usage and
the disasterous consequences that befall the person who muffs it :)
Moreover, whenever some Japanese text is presented (especially dialogues), all
relevant social information should also be given: relative ages, familiarity,
company heirarchy and so on. A lot of textbooks are starting to do this now,
and I think that it's a good thing.
But if early learners (first twelve months, say) are presented with different
styles won't they get confused? Won't it just be information overload?
My answer is NO. Learning a language does not consist of learning a whole
string of 'language facts', endless vocabularly lists and so on. Rather, it
consists of learning groups of inter-related facts. The inter-relationships
are in some ways more important than the individual items, because they
provide the basis for learning more language. To take a simple example, in
my experience the more readings a kanji has, the EASIER it is to memorise.
If I learn a particular kanji in its various uses in Chinese as well as
Japanese then I am LESS likely to be confused. The more connections an
individual 'language item' (character, grammatical rule, vocab item etc) has
with other items, the more firmly entrenched it becomes in the learner's
mind.
So I advocate learning all styles, simultaneously and IN CONTEXT, from
(almost) the very beginning. A side benefit might be that the temptation to
'show off' or 'be cool' would be dramatically reduced.
It is curious, however, that in a given class of students, the ones with the
best communication skills tend to be the ones who master plain form.
Possibly this is because they are interacting with Japanese friends and have
picked up good communication skills along with the sloppy habits, but I
honestly think that more colloquial styles actively promote good
communication. For one thing, there is less pressure to be precise, and that
is good for confidence. Also, it is easier to speak in incomplete sentences,
and that makes it easier for a learner to contribute to the conversation.
There is also the satisfaction of social acceptence that (appropriate) use of
the plain form implies.
Most important is the question of the reward/effort ratio. In language
learning, as well as any other long term activity, the rewards received must
justify the effort spent for the learner to continue studying long enough to
make real progress. (This is why fun study techniques like listening to
Japanese pop music are so effective). I believe that for a lot of learners
the reward/ effort ratio is a lot higher for the plain form than more polite
styles, and that this alone is enough to justify teaching it from a fairly
early stage.
John
Martin Tom Brown
<742cch$m44$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au>
j...@nexus.dgs.monash.edu.au "Jim Breen" wrote:
> lisa wrote in message <36646E...@gci-net.com>...
> >I'm trying not to chuckle... most Japanese citizens learn English at an
> ***** study?
> >early age, because it has become the language of commerce. I have noted
> >that as far as groups picking up second languages go, Japanese learning
> >English are probably the most successful (my opinion). Perhaps it has to
> >do with the high pressure to excel.
>
> This had me and my family practically wetting ourselves with laughter.
> Have you never been to Europe? Have you ever sampled the English speaking
> skills of large proportions of the German population? Singapore
> population? etc. etc. etc.
Most educated Belgians for example speak English better than the
average "English" teacher in a Japanese school. And often know more
grammar than native English speakers (at least the younger ones).
Japanese reading of English is OK given the syllabus, but spoken...
Last time I looked Japanese English teachers were still marking kids
down for pronouncing Apple wrong- "Everyone knows it should be Appuru"
Belgium is perhaps one of the nations which demonstrate what can
be done if schools take language education seriously. Many are
fluent speakers (and readers) of English, French, German and Flemish.
> Many people study English in Japan, but the average
> speaking/reading/writing level is *far* below that of, for example, almost
> every western European country.
My European friends actually found Japanese spoken English harder to
understand because of the way it was mangled from standard forms.
> Perhaps you have interacted with a small self-selected group of motivated
> Japanese. I'm not saying this is a trait of the Japanese themselves; just
> an artifact of the generally awfull way English is taught in Japanese
> schools.
Japanese school "English" teaching is peculiar, aimed at entrance exams
and a lot of language school "English" teaching is even more odd.
More like an edutainment club with high joining fees.
Regards,
--
Martin Brown <mar...@nezumi.demon.co.uk> __ CIS: 71651,470
Scientific Software Consultancy /^,,)__/
Tony Padgett
>
> Tony Padgett wrote:
> > If I go up to a stranger where I say, "Eki doko?", this can give me the
> > answer, but the other person, to whom I'm trying to ask a favor, can
> > become somewhat offensive SINCE I'm asking a favor. This could be
> > interpretted as, "Hey, bud, where's da' station?" Does this sound
> > inviting? In need of help? Again, why not err on the safe side?
>
> I agree! Actually, your blunt question literally translates as "Train
> where?" and you might even get laughed at
Here are a few other phrases that I like to use in English 'as is'
(directly translated):
"Ta da ima!!" ---> "Just NOW!"
"Dotchira desu ka." ---> "Which!"
"Nihon wa nagai desu ka." ---> "Is Japan long?"
"Dotchira kara desu ka." ---> "From where?" (I usually answer
"Ikebukuro" or the last place I came from instead of the answer of
"U.S." like they are expecting.)
These are just a few, and I'm stretching it a bit. I also have to give
credit to Cloudy Bongwater for pointing these out.
--------
Tony Padgett
int...@gol.com
http://www2.gol.com/users/intranz/
Donzaemon
>
> In article <742cch$m44$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au>, Jim Breen
> <j...@nexus.dgs.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>
> >Many people study English in Japan, but the average
> >speaking/reading/writing level is *far* below that of, for example, almost
> >Japan & France, and on the whole, despite rather strong xenophobic &
> >anglophobic attitudes, English is spoken much better in France than in
> >Japan.
Here in Tokyo I've had the opportunity to meet many travelers and others
who
have been to many countries in the world. Several people have told me
that Japan is the only place that they have trouble getting by.
Apparently, in most other places of the world you can get by with
English only but Japan is not up to the same level.
Chuck Douglas
>Chuan Sheng Lin wrote:
>> My experience is that when I applied a job which required person speaking
>> Japanese, Keigo is what people looking for. If you can not use proper Keigo,
>> your hope to be employed is very little, native or not.
>Good point. Isn't this true no matter what language you speak? If you
>can't use a "polite" standard form of the language, you probably won't
>get hired anywhere... McDonald's maybe.
You won't get hired at the McDonald's in Japan. Most of the fast food
joints I have been to here in Japan you Keigo that would make your
head spin (and it usually does.) KFC is probably the "worst" at this.
--
Chuck Douglas -- chuc...@jaka.ece.uiuc.edu
"I don't pretend I have all the answers/Just the obvious ones"
--_Backbone_ by Baby Animals
Homepage down until further notice.
Miles Bader
> For example, if your Japanese boss speaks down to you in abrupt, blunt
> speech forms, you would offend if you responded in a similar speech
> pattern.
I find myself in this situation often; I find it very wierd to be
blathering along with -masu or whatever, and my boss responding with
more plain forms; it's always hard for me to not starting doing the same
thing!!! I guess she would just assume it's my atrocious command of the
language and not care so much (the amount of cluelessness on my part
that she puts up with is rather astonishing), but ...
-Miles
--
`Cars give people wonderful freedom and increase their opportunities. But
they also destroy the environment, to an extent so drastic that they kill
all social life' (from _A Pattern Language_)
Thor Asmund
> Q. *WHY* do young children learn the plain forms first?
>
> A. Because they are the root forms. The more polite forms are
> formed *from* them.
>
> In teaching *ONLY* the -masu forms first (which is what most programs
> do) and deferring the plain forms until sometimes *years* later, it is
> as if you attempted to teach English by teaching *only* the
> conjugated forms - and neglected to teach the root forms. Thus you
> taught 'running' and 'ran', but never taught 'run': The
> *ONLY* form a learner can use to find the word in a dictionary.
>
> This adds considerable burden to the learner's task.
Here I must disagree.
It eases the task of learning Japanese fast, because the -masu form of the verbs
are much easier to conjugate in negtive, past, tentative and so on. Whereas
conjugating the dictionary form requires schemes and learning to differ between
regualr and irregular verbs.
-Thor
--------------------
Thor Asmund
E-mail: nafai$blackbird.poocher.com ($->@ spam avoidance, no da!)
News: dk.kultur.sprog sci.lang.japan
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <3664E270...@gol.com>, Scott Reynolds <s...@gol.com> wrote:
>I can't imagine a Japanese language course deferring the plain forms
>for years. You need to know the plain forms to be able to form
>relative clauses and to modify nouns. It is simply not possible to
>delay teaching them as long as you claim some courses do.
I just checked over the text. Conjugation of adjectives is introduced
near the end of the first year/beginning of the second year; relative
clauses wouldn't be introduced until well into the 2nd year at the
pace the instructor was moving. So yes, you could darn well delay
teaching them that long.
Now - the problem could have been the pace of instruction (although I
doubt it - this was considered a 'heavy' class with 6 hours of
instruction per week in a university environment). But I personally
found the pace to already be head spinning - so *many* new things
to assimilate in such a brief time. I can't imagine what it would
take to complete the book in only one year (and still remember much
of it). If you were in a total immersion situation, probably.
'Yookoso' is a peculiar text in some ways - the entire book is
only 7 chapters - but the book is over 500 pages and you only
begin "Chapter 1" after having *already* learned a lot (the
'Getting Started' section covers the kana, greetings, time,
telephone numbers, likes and dislikes, location, numbers to 9,999,
existance, price, daily activities and a number of other things.)
It has ~250 entries in the vocabulary section you are supposed to
have mastered before you *START* "Chapter 1". Kanji is introduced
starting with the first page of Chapter 1.
To those who have used more intensive texts or who had instructors
that went faster, that may not seem like a lot. But it was a lot to
me. I have seen texts which introduce vocabulary and grammar faster
- - but they traded off not learning the kana and kanji in return for
that.
Benjamin Franz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBNmVkYejpikN3V52xAQFLDAP9Ezpeb5Qrf8ZWmtx5IDgxtHiCXfqp7zI1
npfJXmGHTCgL8aaVpWUg0So361A/P8WloxO7BpBp7rhNXubf2APerHHX6xMwdDr9
JQpavZ7uZFATA+XcuQA/1fO3PXvzLjwp71xdRINvnEkv+2QZx0A4NDCM5e8NJqxB
t78cn3GQ89U=
=5LCA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <36655E74...@blackbird.poocher.com>,
Thor Asmund <na...@blackbird.poocher.com> wrote:
>Here I must disagree.
>It eases the task of learning Japanese fast, because the -masu form
>of the verbs are much easier to conjugate in negtive, past, tentative
>and so on. Whereas conjugating the dictionary form requires schemes
>and learning to differ between regualr and irregular verbs.
It may aid learning it _fast_ but it hinders learning it _well_. If you
know the dictionary form and you memorize three simple rules you *HAVE*
the -masu form for almost every verb.
Godan verbs: Change the final '-u' to an 'i' and add '-masu'.
Ichidan verbs: Drop the final '-ru' for '-eru' or '-iru' and add '-masu'
Kuru, Suru: kimasu, shimasu.
You now *HAVE* the -masu form for 99%+ of all Japanese verbs. And the
rule takes only moments to teach. So starting from the dictionary
form, you have added only moments to the time needed to teach the
'-masu' forms. But if you start from the '-masu' forms, you
have a layer of opacity that greatly obstructs learning on the long
term.
Before you can form the plain forms, you have to *first* know what
the dictionary form is - something that cannot be derived
from the '-masu' form: The '-masu' transformation is not reversible.
So instead of memorizing the verbs ONCE plus a few rules for
conjugation, you are memorizing verbs in multiple forms as if they
were completely different words. If you only plan on learning a *few*
verbs that is ok, but if you are trying to attain fluency - it's a
disaster.
Benjamin Franz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBNmV1IOjpikN3V52xAQGNewP+JxkQCPvcExGSQe3tVb3cO2YFjvc7VMPB
1C7mszf9K+bdnFFAmIO72MUbAehT9N4WtWeoFq7+U+l322dmJkEbaVh2UL07VwvO
aoZmcn1qqe7Ok/xL3mUv98QpMKhhsZjAgSGutMf/srMcKnQFi97lxuSfP5mrU9uI
a0wUrS1L//Q=
=dnK8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Martin Tom Brown
<2v90gq5...@spls61.ccs.mt.nec.co.jp>
mi...@ccs.mt.nec.co.jp "Miles Bader" wrote:
> cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) writes:
> > For example, if your Japanese boss speaks down to you in abrupt, blunt
> > speech forms, you would offend if you responded in a similar speech
> > pattern.
>
> I find myself in this situation often; I find it very wierd to be
> blathering along with -masu or whatever, and my boss responding with
> more plain forms; it's always hard for me to not starting doing the same
> thing!!! I guess she would just assume it's my atrocious command of the
> language and not care so much (the amount of cluelessness on my part
> that she puts up with is rather astonishing), but ...
I recall our office trouble maker used to reply to the boss
when he was angry with some kind of inappropriate super polite
form that used to make him go ballistic (the boss that is).
Used to make the office very noisy if they had a set too...
lisa
the door and do nothing but say "irrashaimase" to every person who
walked through the door.
lisa
Chuck Douglas wrote:
> You won't get hired at the McDonald's in Japan. Most of the fast food
> joints I have been to here in Japan you Keigo that would make your
> head spin (and it usually does.) KFC is probably the "worst" at this.
--
lisa
> OTOH, it *is* a perfectly acceptable and very informal way of asking. It
> may sound funny to you, but I've heard it a million times.
It may be right, but it's a tad barbaric... at least in direct
translation. Or is it Encino Man Japanese?
lisa
lisa
> You do realise that I'm talking about teachers *in Japan*, don't you?
I'm not psychic enough to assume what you don't state. shikata ga nai...
> Remove my pants to reply.
really mature
lisa
> Have you never been to Europe? Have you ever sampled the English speaking
> skills of large proportions of the German population? Singapore
> population? etc. etc. etc.
My world travels have been limited to Tokyo, Okinawa, Manila, Guam, and
roughly 20 states. I grew up in Hawaii, where Japanese is realatively
common.
> Perhaps you have interacted with a small self-selected group of motivated
> Japanese. I'm not saying this is a trait of the Japanese themselves; just
> an artifact of the generally awfull way English is taught in Japanese
> schools.
Perhaps. What disturbs me more is the "generally awfull way English is
taught" in America.
Sean Holland
what Jim wrote below? It's as close to being a fact as is the Round Earth
Theory, despite what the cartoon character Tanaka might say.
In article <D-Day-02129...@ppp203205.asahi-net.or.jp>,
D-...@animal.com (Daniel Simpson Day) wrote:
>In article <742cch$m44$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au>, Jim Breen
><j...@nexus.dgs.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>
>>Many people study English in Japan, but the average
>>speaking/reading/writing level is *far* below that of, for example, almost
>>every western European country. Crikey, we have lived and worked in both
>>Japan & France, and on the whole, despite rather strong xenophobic &
>>anglophobic attitudes, English is spoken much better in France than in
>>Japan.
>
>You have just reopened that big festering wound of a discussion/flame war.
>Within 24 hours, Tanaka will post his "FAKE" to refute that statement, and
>you will draw flames from several of the regular posters to this NG.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Could I have 10,000 marbles please?" Kent Dorfman
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>BLUES, ELWOOD
>ILLINOIS LICENSE : B263-1655-2187
>CURRENTLY UNDER SUSPENSION
>WARRANTS OUTSTANDING : PARKG. 116
>MOVING VIOLATIONS : 56
>ARREST DRIVER ... IMPOUND VEHICLE
>------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Sean
Due to spam filtering, mail from hotmail or prodigy will not reach me.
Anthony J. Bryant
>
> Anthony J. Bryant wrote:
> > OTOH, it *is* a perfectly acceptable and very informal way of asking. It
> > may sound funny to you, but I've heard it a million times.
>
> It may be right, but it's a tad barbaric... at least in direct
> translation. Or is it Encino Man Japanese?
No, it's very informal Japanese.
You've never lived in Japan, have you? <G>
Tony
lisa
> Now, are you ready to discuss the problems of Japanese learners in relation
> to English communication and the roots of this problem which lay in the
> Japanese education system? Or are you going to drop off the thread with glib
> comments for everyone with whom there is a difference of opinion?
I always have been ready, sir. I never noticed your sig, and I just
noticed your tacky end-line. Feel free to not pardon my personal
opinions. My ego is quite healthy thank you.
Razzbar
>
> I'm trying not to chuckle... most Japanese citizens learn English at an
> that as far as groups picking up second languages go, Japanese learning
> English are probably the most successful (my opinion). Perhaps it has to
> do with the high pressure to excel.
>
English as far as I've seen. The pronounciation of some sounds and
grammar are obvious, but the real problem seems to be self consciousness.
In my experience, Germans seem to have the least problem with English. I
remember asking a German woman where she grew up, and being astounded
when she told me she was from Germany and had only been in the states
for two years. I hadn't even noticed an accent. OTOH, my Kyushu-born
stepmother has been in the US for 40 years and still has a very thick
accent. She tells me they started English in the 6th grade before the
war.
There must be some different "schools" of teaching English to Japanese,
because I seem to detect two different "modes" of fluency. Some seem to
do WAY better than others in pronounciation. I don't know why that is,
but it's almost as if there are two distinct Japanese accents.
PS, FWIW, I've been told by Frenchman that Japanese speak very good
French. I'm sure there are some languages that are easier to learn
than others for the speakers of various languages, but I was surprised
to hear him say that Japanese seem to do better than a lot of people
at mastering French.
Charles Eicher
> In article <2v90gq5...@spls61.ccs.mt.nec.co.jp>,
>
> Miles Bader <mi...@ccs.mt.nec.co.jp> wrote:
>
> > cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) writes:
> > > For example, if your Japanese boss speaks down to you in abrupt, blunt
> > > speech forms, you would offend if you responded in a similar speech
> > > pattern.
>
> > I find myself in this situation often; I find it very wierd to be
> > blathering along with -masu or whatever, and my boss responding with
> > more plain forms; it's always hard for me to not starting doing the same
> > thing!!! I guess she would just assume it's my atrocious command of the
> > language and not care so much (the amount of cluelessness on my part
> > that she puts up with is rather astonishing), but ...
>
> It's a strange feeling, itsn't it? Yet most conversations in Japanese
> companies are like that, with the superior talking to the junior in plain
> form, and the junior talking back politely. At first, it was also weirld
> being in conversations with both a boss and a subordinate, where you have to
> talk in differenct levels depending on which person the comment or question
> is direct to.
Yep, and there are all sorts of variations on that theme that are even
worse. But lets not get into that.
I suppose it is appropriate to recommend a couple of books that I have
found particularly invaluable in comprehending the keigo rules.
"Minimum Essential Politeness" by Agnes Niekawa, ISBN 4-7700-1624-7
This book is primarily written in English, and is a quite excellent
explanation of all aspects of politeness besides just keigo. For example,
donatory verbs (giving and receiving) as well as personal pronouns are
explained. This book has extensive lists of example sentences, restated in
ascending levels of politeness. This is an extremely valuable method of
presenting keigo. Also addresses (to a small degree) male vs. female speech
patterns. My biggest reservation about this book is that it contains no
kanji, all examples are in romaji.
"gaikokujin no tame no nihongo reibun - mondai shiriizu: #10 keigo"
a/k/a "Japanese for Foreigners, #10 keigo"
This book is entirely in Japanese. I studied this book as a unit on keigo
in 4th year Japanese, and I found it exceptionally valuable. Contains
chapters explaining basic keigo concepts and then extensive drills on those
concepts. Also discusses "set phrases" and I learned a LOT of formal
phrases I'd never heard of (or perhaps, I HAD heard but never noticed).
I studied these books before doing some job interviews with Japanese
companies, and my keigo seemed to work OK in that formal circumstance (its
always hard to tell). However, at that job fair, I picked up a publication
by Nihon Keizai Shimbun with interview tips for recent Japanese college
graduates. That book actually recommends that you do not use elaborate
keigo in job interviews, but speak in a normal respectful level. They
apparently believe that new grads were more likely to make keigo errors
that might cause offense, rather than make a good impression by proper use
of keigo.
jonathan
>On 2 Dec, in article
>average "English" teacher in a Japanese school. And often know more
>grammar than native English speakers (at least the younger ones).
>Japanese reading of English is OK given the syllabus, but spoken...
>
'Points of View' (A BBC viewers' comments forum) that included various
letters from Dutch and Belgian BBC viewers.
They were actually complaining about the poor standard of English spoken in
TV dramas that made it very difficult for them to understand the plot etc.
Not very surprising if you've ever seriously listened to the English spoken
in a program like 'Eastenders' or 'Coronation Street'....
jonathan
Allan
Snowhare wrote in message ...
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
>
>In article <36655E74...@blackbird.poocher.com>,
>Thor Asmund <na...@blackbird.poocher.com> wrote:
>>Here I must disagree.
>>It eases the task of learning Japanese fast, because the -masu form
>>of the verbs are much easier to conjugate in negtive, past, tentative
>>and so on. Whereas conjugating the dictionary form requires schemes
>>and learning to differ between regualr and irregular verbs.
>
>It may aid learning it _fast_ but it hinders learning it _well_. If you
>know the dictionary form and you memorize three simple rules you *HAVE*
>the -masu form for almost every verb.
>
>Godan verbs: Change the final '-u' to an 'i' and add '-masu'.
>
>Ichidan verbs: Drop the final '-ru' for '-eru' or '-iru' and add '-masu'
>
>Kuru, Suru: kimasu, shimasu.
>
>You now *HAVE* the -masu form for 99%+ of all Japanese verbs. And the
>rule takes only moments to teach. So starting from the dictionary
>form, you have added only moments to the time needed to teach the
>'-masu' forms. But if you start from the '-masu' forms, you
>have a layer of opacity that greatly obstructs learning on the long
>term.
This is all well & good, but another reason for teaching the -masu forms
first IS to place the emphasis on these forms as they are the most important
for working and meeting new people, which do seem to happen somehow when one
goes to another country...
What I didn't like was the fact that deriving the -masu form is THAT easy to
remember. I just learned the plain forms on my own and it DID make some
aspects easier. If you can conjugate the various plain forms then doing the
same for -masu is a breeze.
Still, if "well" means getting on OK and NOT offending people, I'll take
the -masu first, thanks. When it is taught FIRST, it somehow becomes the
students "default", which is a good idea.
Allan.
jonathan
>Both of your points are true - but I think mask a problem that is best
>pointed out in the form of a question:
>
>Q. *WHY* do young children learn the plain forms first?
>
>A. Because they are the root forms. The more polite forms are
> formed *from* them.
>
Assuming that Japanese children learn the dictionary form not as any
consequence of instruction in said form but because it is the natural
'mother tongue' for all Japanese; I'd like to know how and when they
develop the ability to determine when they should use the plain form and
when to use the -masu form. For the record I've yet to hear my niece or
three nephews use the -masu form once...I suppose when you consider that
most of their conversation seems to pertain to toilet goings on and Nintendo
that's not really surprising !!
I would like to know where & when the 'more polite' language is learned. Is
this part of the Japanese school curriculum ? Or is it, as I suspect, just a
naturally occurring development of language use - in the same way that
English speakers are never taught how to construct the more polite forms
such as "Would you mind ?" & "I'd be obliged if..." & "Do you think it's
possible ?". I can't ever recall having these drummed into me at my
regimented school. "Yes, sir" "No, sir" and a suitably 'non-whining' "Please
sir" were usually sufficient.
BTW if anyone has any serious study references regarding the 'science'
behind Japanese grammar development and language usage I'd be very
interested in details (English works only please).
jonathan
Jason Cormier
lisa wrote in message <3665BB...@gci-net.com>...
>Jason Cormier wrote:
>> You do realise that I'm talking about teachers *in Japan*, don't you?
>
>I'm not psychic enough to assume what you don't state. shikata ga nai...
Goodness, my sig. says I'm in Japan and I make reference to the Japanese
education system/schools. To what did you think I was making reference?
>> Remove my pants to reply.
>
>really mature
Speaking of lack of maturity, I suppose, in your ego-wounded state, you felt
the need to get in some some kind of dig. Do you feel better now?
Now, are you ready to discuss the problems of Japanese learners in relation
to English communication and the roots of this problem which lay in the
Japanese education system? Or are you going to drop off the thread with glib
comments for everyone with whom there is a difference of opinion?
--
Jason Cormier
Hisai, Japan
Tokyo...@hotmail.com
Miles Bader <mi...@ccs.mt.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) writes:
> > For example, if your Japanese boss speaks down to you in abrupt, blunt
> > speech forms, you would offend if you responded in a similar speech
> > pattern.
>
> I find myself in this situation often; I find it very wierd to be
> blathering along with -masu or whatever, and my boss responding with
> more plain forms; it's always hard for me to not starting doing the same
> thing!!! I guess she would just assume it's my atrocious command of the
> language and not care so much (the amount of cluelessness on my part
> that she puts up with is rather astonishing), but ...
>
It's a strange feeling, itsn't it? Yet most conversations in Japanese
companies are like that, with the superior talking to the junior in plain
form, and the junior talking back politely. At first, it was also weirld
being in conversations with both a boss and a subordinate, where you have to
talk in differenct levels depending on which person the comment or question
is direct to.
TP
jre...@my-dejanews.com
> It eases the task of learning Japanese fast, because the -masu form of the
> verbs are much easier to conjugate in negtive, past, tentative and so on.
> Whereas conjugating the dictionary form requires schemes and learning to
> differ between regualr and irregular verbs.
True, and no doubt this is one of the main reasons for traditional textbooks
being structured the way they are. However, there are some major
disadvantages to this approach which have so far gone unnoticed in this
thread.
(1)
One of the main tasks facing every language learner (including children
learning their first language) is to make distinctions: between words with
similar sounds, words with similar meanings, between past and present,
positive and negative, shades of colour, degrees of size, temperature,
distance and whatever other distinctions the language happens to make.
This is why it is a good habit to learn the antonym of every adjective you
learn. It also explains why we can have such long threads (over and over
again:) on the difference between 'shiru' and 'wakaru' and the various
personal pronouns.
Now the trouble with '-masu' is that it takes a while to learn to ignore it.
All the important semantic information is packed right up near the front of
the verb, and is all to easily drowned out by bucketloads of '-masen
deshita'.
Fundamental words, such as 'go' and 'come', suffer worst of all. Consider the
Nihongo newbie trying to analyse the following:
ikimasu kimashita
ikimashita kimashita
ikimasen kimasen
ikimasen deshita kimasen deshita
The most obvious pattern is that all these words contain '-mas-' (actually
they all contain '-kimas-' but that red herring will probably only confuse
for about half an hour). And this means...? - practically nothing. On
average, at least half the phonetic information is useless in terms of making
semantic distinctions - the most important task of an early language learner.
Now compare
iku kuru
itta kita
ikanai konai
ikanakatta konakatta
Looking with 'naive eyes' for a moment (if possible), the most obvious
patterns are that iku and kuru both end in '-u' and the past forms all end in
'-ta'. A long way from a full understanding of what is going on, but a much
more productive start.
Now, yes, I have chosen an extreme example, and an irregular verb to boot.
But this does not detract from the argument: 1) learning language involves
making DISTINCTIONS 2) '-masu' is redundant information from the point of
view of an early language learner, unless s/he knows the plain form already
and can make a DISTINCTION. 3) therefore teaching '-masu' first creates an
unnecessary obstacle to learning Japanse, just at the time when students are
most keen.
(Think for a moment what would happen if keen students went out of their way
to show off their mastery of polite forms, rather than the other way around
as at present).
I started learning Mandarin about a fortnight before I started on Japanese.
I found it MUCH easier to learn to differentiate 'horse' (ma3) and 'mother'
(ma1) than to sort out kimasu, ikimasu, kikimasu, hikimasu, hakimasu,
kakimasu, dakimasu, dekimasu, dokimasu, nokimasu, norimasu, ...
Why? Because in Mandarin (as in plain form Japanese) ALL phonetic information
is significant.
Of course, eventually I stopped hearing '-masu' and I could actually
comprehend what was being said to me, but not until I stopped saying it for a
couple of months...
(2)
One of the major barriers facing adult language learners is pyschological: not
being able to communicate smoothly is very uncomfortable, it even threatens
one's sense of identity. This is particularly acute with young adults who are
just trying to establish their sense of identity. Does teaching '-masu' etc
right from the beginning increase or decrease this psychological pressure?
(3)
To move from simple exchanges - greetings, buying and selling, finding the
toilet or the train station, etc - into 'real' conversation requires mastering
'mini-narratives', ie sequences of events.
The easiest way to do this in Japanese is to use the '-te' form:
kyoo, ginkou ni itte, o-kane o tarasoo to shimashita kedo, maa...
And the easiest way to learn the '-te' form is probably to learn the '-ta'
form in simple past tense sentences - the kind of thing you can read in a
newspaper or a short story or novel. Worthy objectives, surely.
Personally, my Japanese ability (and my confidence) only started to take off
once I learnt the '-te' form. I could have 'real' conversations, I started
focusing on what was 'significant' phonetic information, and the pyschological
pressure of finishing sentences drecreased dramatically.
(4)
A huge percentage of students of Japanese have enormous difficulties with
relative clauses and so never end up being able to say anything interesting.
Part of the problem is clearly their ignorance (in many cases) of the grammar
of their own language, but more often the trouble is that they never really
became CONFIDENT with the plain form in the first place.
By waiting until just before introducing relative clauses to introduce the
plain form, Japanese teachers are shooting themselves in both feet with both
barrels.
(5)
"Japanese is SUCH a difficult language to learn. There are three different
writing systems and three different politeness levels. It is all SO
complicated."
How many times have you heard something like that from someone who has started
to learn Japanese but given up in frustration?
IMNSHO Japanese politeness systems are a lot more straightforward than in
English. Sure it's complicated, but English relies on intonation,
articulation, interpersonal grammatical metaphor and careful vocabularly
choices which are a lot harder to summarise into a neat set of rules.
Now consider some of the aspects of Japanese grammar:
no plurals
no person (in the predicate)
no gender
no subject/verb agreement
very few irregular verbs
On balance, Japanese is an EASY language to learn, so why do we insist on
dumping newbies into the deep end, into a mire of '-masu' and 'desu' and other
subtleties which are not really going to make sense until the learner has
interacted with a moderately wide cross-section of Japanese society?
I'll leave the writing system right alone for now :)
(6)
In Japanese, it's quite common to say one-word sentences. Usually this will
be just a predicate or a question word:
itta?
un, itta.
tanoshikatta?
iya, tanoshikunakatta.
dooshite?
kanojo ga konakatta kara sa.
So predicates are both important and powerful. The reward/effort ratio for
studying predicates is quite high. So mastering predicates, which should
include plain forms, should be a pretty high priority for students and
teachers of Japanese.
In fact, predicates a logical prior to particles, because the 'meaning' of a
particle depends on the type of predicate associated with it. 'o', for
instance, means something quite different when used with a verb of motion
(like tobu) rather than a verb of creation/ destrucion (like taberu).
Of course, you can only get just so far with one-word sentences, and it would
be foolish to ignore particles, but I'm talking about relative emphasis here.
Particles tend to be a lit opaque to speakers of a relatively uninflected
language like English, and would almost certainly be easier to understand if
accompanied by a better understanding of predicates.
(7)
Without a good working knowledge of the structure of Japanese (including
relative clauses, conjunctions, and 'auxilaries' like '-te kudasai' and '-te
miru') no student of Japanese will be able to communicate well enough to
offend anyone.
I believe that the initial focus should be communication and understanding.
(8)
A survey of Japanese tourists in Sydney questioning them about their
impressions of the Japanese abilities of local service staff found that while
most visitors believed their hosts to have good technical skills (proper use
of keigo etc) they were generally unimpressed with the level of respect
demonstrated in body language and tone of voice etc.
If we could measure 'offence', I believe we would get a lower response from
'plain form + friendly smile' than 'sonkeigo + scowl'.
Teaching inter-cultural relations needs to be part of an overall package, so
that students WANT to learn the polite forms.
(9)
I also agree with Benjamin's argument about it being easier to add '-masu'
than subtract it.
John
Jean Christophe Helary
<j...@nexus.dgs.monash.edu.au> wrote:
:-) Many people study English in Japan, but the average
:-) speaking/reading/writing level is *far* below that of, for example, almost
:-) every western European country. Crikey, we have lived and worked in both
:-) Japan & France, and on the whole, despite rather strong xenophobic &
:-) anglophobic attitudes, English is spoken much better in France than in
:-) Japan.
I do feel honored (I'm french ;-) but I would like to add something : I am
a member of the jet programme, been here for almost 2 years now and have a
lot of opportunities to think about foreign language teaching here. One
thing that is pretty obvious is that the closest english speaking country
is pretty far from Japan which is not the case for France or any other
country in Europe, since we have Great Britain up there.
Second thing is that in most European countries we have a choice of
different languages starting in junior high that we can study : I France,
compulsory education includes a first foreign language (7 years) a second
one (5 years) and eventually a third one (2 years) plus latin or greek for
the nerds. We have a lot opportunities to travel across the border (a few
hours by train) and practice our Spanish-German-Italian etc...
More, with the building of the EU we feel strongly compeled to speak at
least one foreign language. When I was in JH, the fashion was to take
German as FL and English or Spanish as SL.
I Japan there is no choice (well, most of the schools propose only
english) and if you want to practice you have to go very far away in
countries that are not even culturaly 'close' to yours...
Plus, in France you have tests for all the languages you studied to
graduate from HS, in Japan, if you study French as a SL, you will not have
to pass any exam and anyway, you will concentrate on English because it is
what matters to enter a good univerity (any english native has ever tried
the english test to enter Todai ???). In France most of the tests are
interviews in Japan there is no interview (now you wonder about the real
impact the Jet has on his pupils...)
In the end , the result is that trere are much more probabilities that a
french person will (at least) speak better English than a japanese person.
But can we really make such generalities ???
I wish I could address the issue of the perception of foreign countries
through the japanese educational system, but I have to work now :-)
ps : how many times have you been asked to write your name in 'English'
when the person who asks really means 'romaji'...
Jean Christophe Helary, Kagawa Prefecture
Jason Cormier
lisa wrote in message <3665EA...@gci-net.com>...
>Jason Cormier wrote:
>> Now, are you ready to discuss the problems of Japanese learners in
relation
>> to English communication and the roots of this problem which lay in the
>> Japanese education system? Or are you going to drop off the thread with
glib
>> comments for everyone with whom there is a difference of opinion?
>I always have been ready, sir. I never noticed your sig, and I just
>noticed your tacky end-line. Feel free to not pardon my personal
>opinions. My ego is quite healthy thank you.
I have no problem with personal opinions about the issues at hand. However,
glib personal attacks after having your opinion challenged don't strike me
as terribly relevant or appropriate.
Now, please be so kind as to explain why you believe, against the general
consensus of foreign English teachers in Japan, that Japanese students are
the most successful at acquiring English. I'm also curious why you believe
that they "learn English at an
early age" when, in fact, they start learning the language much later than
most European countries where English is taught as a non-native language.
Jim Breen
>>Jim Breen wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps you have interacted with a small self-selected group of motivated
>>> Japanese. I'm not saying this is a trait of the Japanese themselves; just
>>> an artifact of the generally awfull way English is taught in Japanese
>>> schools.
>>Perhaps. What disturbs me more is the "generally awfull way English is
>>taught" in America.
Really? I thought it was taught at about the same standard as is history,
geography, mathematics,...... 8-)}
--
Jim Breen School of Computer Science & Software Engineering
Email: j.b...@csse.monash.edu.au Monash University
http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/ Clayton VIC 3168 Australia
P: +61 3 9905 3298 F: 9905 3574 ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学
Tokyo...@hotmail.com
Mar...@nezumi.demon.co.uk wrote:
> On 02 Dec, in article
> <2v90gq5...@spls61.ccs.mt.nec.co.jp>
> mi...@ccs.mt.nec.co.jp "Miles Bader" wrote:
>
> > cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) writes:
> > > For example, if your Japanese boss speaks down to you in abrupt, blunt
> > > speech forms, you would offend if you responded in a similar speech
> > > pattern.
> >
> > I find myself in this situation often; I find it very wierd to be
> > blathering along with -masu or whatever, and my boss responding with
> > more plain forms; it's always hard for me to not starting doing the same
> > thing!!! I guess she would just assume it's my atrocious command of the
> > language and not care so much (the amount of cluelessness on my part
> > that she puts up with is rather astonishing), but ...
>
> I recall our office trouble maker used to reply to the boss
> when he was angry with some kind of inappropriate super polite
> form that used to make him go ballistic (the boss that is).
> Used to make the office very noisy if they had a set too...
>
Actually, that's a pretty common way of expressing anger, although it seem to
be more often used by women than men. Sometimes wives will address husbands
with keigo when they're mad. The happens in English as well. When your mother
called you by your complete name, you knew she was hot.
TP
Scott Reynolds
> I recall our office trouble maker used to reply to the boss
> when he was angry with some kind of inappropriate super polite
> form that used to make him go ballistic (the boss that is).
> Used to make the office very noisy if they had a set too...
This is one of the most useful aspects of keigo -- its sarcastic
possibilities. It seems to me that keigo is used in this way rather
often, actually.
_______________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@gol.com
Tokyo...@hotmail.com
cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) wrote:
.
>
>
>
>
> of keigo.
>
Hear! Hear! Not only are you likely to make more mistakes tripping over your
tounge speaking in unfamiliar territory, you will likely wind up being
nervous and worrying more about *how* you are saying things than *what* you
are saying. "desu/masu" form is fine, expecially if you start off with a few
set keigo phrases.
It's really amusing to hear the new (Japanese) employees every year when they
are totally screwing up keigo.
Chuck Douglas
[edit]
>
> ps : how many times have you been asked to write your name in 'English'
> when the person who asks really means 'romaji'...
>
If I were to write it in 'romaji,' it would come out funny. More like
"Chakku" or "Chak." I have Japanese friends that occassionally write to me
in English and "spell" my name that way. They should know better. I have
been slowly
managing to retrain them to get it right.
Fortunately, most of them write to me in Japanese and they have be
conditioned to use "茶気" instead, which I prefer. :-)
--
Chuck （茶気） Douglas -- chuc...@gol.com
"I don't pretend I have all the answers/Just the obvious ones"
--_Backbone_ by Baby Animals
Homepage down until further notice.
Sean Holland
>Jean Christophe Helary wrote:
>[edit]
>>
>> ps : how many times have you been asked to write your name in 'English'
>> when the person who asks really means 'romaji'...
>>
>
>If I were to write it in 'romaji,' it would come out funny. More like
>"Chakku" or "Chak." I have Japanese friends that occassionally write to me
>in English and "spell" my name that way. They should know better. I have
>been slowly
>managing to retrain them to get it right.
>
But what should a person with a name like Jean Christophe do if he
were asked to write his name in English? Write "John Christopher"?
This brings up an interesting point. If you want to ask someone to
write their name in Roman letters, eg. "Sean", as opposed to romaji,
eg."Shoon", I guess you'd have to ask them アルファベットで書いてください。
(Arufabetto de kaite kudasai.)
muchan
> > companies are like that, with the superior talking to the junior in plain
> > form, and the junior talking back politely. At first, it was also weirld
> > being in conversations with both a boss and a subordinate, where you have to
> > talk in differenct levels depending on which person the comment or question
> > is direct to.
>
> worse. But lets not get into that.
>
> found particularly invaluable in comprehending the keigo rules.
>
I agree, that this is the big difficulty of learning how to act in Japanese society.
I wonder, however, if this "hierarchy" system should be respected forever.
I think most part of them are just remining of feudalism. I'm not against showing
respect to aged people, but I don't feel I need to respect every boss or professor
simply because they are boss, or professor. Yes, I'm out from Japanese society
in many ways, (haw well I manage my keigo usage and I hide myself behind my
behavour, my "anti-herarchy" thinking show itself somewhere and causes problems).
In this regard I feel much easier living in Western society.
So, for students of Japanese, it's necesarry to know how Japense speak each other,
how Japanese society functions, but I don't necessary think kaigo as the beutiful
part of Japanese... (I'm leberal in respect people. I feel natural to use kaigo for
people I respect, or people I might respect when I'll know them, but when speaking
politely to the people who demands me to speak politely, hypocricy clicks in my heart.
Some bosses are really not worth respecting...
muchan
muchan
> Second thing is that in most European countries we have a choice of
> different languages starting in junior high that we can study : I France,
> compulsory education includes a first foreign language (7 years) a second
> one (5 years) and eventually a third one (2 years) plus latin or greek for
> the nerds. We have a lot opportunities to travel across the border (a few
> hours by train) and practice our Spanish-German-Italian etc...
> More, with the building of the EU we feel strongly compeled to speak at
> least one foreign language. When I was in JH, the fashion was to take
> German as FL and English or Spanish as SL.
I don't know on which newsgroup you're reading this crossposted thread.
(I delete <soc.culture.japan>, because my concern here is language related.
In <fj.sci.japan>, a poster Mr.Onizuka, whose articles I enjoy a lot, is
repeatedly writing about his thinking on the education of national language,
that in Franch, French is taught like a foreign language, since reading and
writing French in correct manner needs quite an intelligence and through
mastering of grammer. He thinks it (the difficulty of using their own language
correctly) helps to support French elite system. He thinks Japanese language,
despite kanji and complecated writing system, is easier language for native
speakers, (once childrens learn how to read write characters, they can express
virtually anything they think, without much concern on grammer or spelling)
and Japanese national language education can concentrate reading and writing
text from early age.
How do you think about it as a French person in Japan?
I hope I could write my point enough clear.
muchan (native Japanese on <sci.lang.japan> )
> I Japan there is no choice (well, most of the schools propose only
> english) and if you want to practice you have to go very far away in
> countries that are not even culturaly 'close' to yours...
> Plus, in France you have tests for all the languages you studied to
> graduate from HS, in Japan, if you study French as a SL, you will not have
> to pass any exam and anyway, you will concentrate on English because it is
> what matters to enter a good univerity (any english native has ever tried
> the english test to enter Todai ???). In France most of the tests are
> interviews in Japan there is no interview (now you wonder about the real
> impact the Jet has on his pupils...)
>
> In the end , the result is that trere are much more probabilities that a
> french person will (at least) speak better English than a japanese person.
> But can we really make such generalities ???
>
> I wish I could address the issue of the perception of foreign countries
> through the japanese educational system, but I have to work now :-)
>
> ps : how many times have you been asked to write your name in 'English'
> when the person who asks really means 'romaji'...
>
Jason Cormier
Daniel Simpson Day wrote in message ...
>And last night on Beat Takeshi's "Koko ga hen dayo nihonjin" there
>were Fukushima Univ. students complaining "Why is it when Japanese
>go abroad, they try their best to study foreign language guidebooks, but
>foreigners in Japan just speak English to anybody?"
>
>What a bunch of monolingual losers...I thought....
I almost hesitate to ask to which group you are referring. Almost...
Jason Cormier
Daniel Simpson Day wrote in message ...
>>I do feel honored (I'm french ;-) but I would like to add something : I am
>>a member of the jet programme,
>
>I would recommend that you don't post to USENET while on the
>Program[me] since MONBUSHO does monitor the net for all
>posts related to the program.
Or he could simply adopt a pseudonym. Perhaps a character from a classic
comedy. If only I could offer him an example...
Gerald B Mathias
: Thor Asmund wrote:
: > It eases the task of learning Japanese fast, because the -masu form of the
: > verbs are much easier to conjugate in negtive, past, tentative and so on.
: > Whereas conjugating the dictionary form requires schemes and learning to
: > differ between regualr and irregular verbs.
: True, and no doubt this is one of the main reasons for traditional textbooks
: being structured the way they are. However, there are some major
: disadvantages to this approach which have so far gone unnoticed in this
: thread.
: (1)
[A fair number of disadvantages not repeated here]
Another one that I usually bring up when this subject arises is that
when you learn a -masu form, you miss the word accent.
-masu forms are always (using the upper case = raised pitch notation):
...MAs(u) ...MAsh(i)ta ...MASEn(desh[i]ta
One syllable verb stems (de- ko-, shi-, mi-, etc.) are always low
pitched; two-syllable stems (I use "stem" for root plus any "i"
that might be attached, such as miYE-, yoM-I, ka-I, etc.) are always
LH, 3-syllables, LHH, etc.
When you get around to learning the plain form of a verb you already
"know," you have to pick up the accent along with it. (Well, better
late than never...)
Bart
Gerald B Mathias
: I suppose it is appropriate to recommend a couple of books that I have
: found particularly invaluable in comprehending the keigo rules.
: "Minimum Essential Politeness" by Agnes Niekawa, ISBN 4-7700-1624-7
That'll work out better as Niyekawa, if an alphabetized list is involved.
^
(I'll have to ask her why she decided to use that "y.")
Bart
Mike Wright
>
> Jim Breen wrote:
> > Have you never been to Europe? Have you ever sampled the English speaking
> > skills of large proportions of the German population? Singapore
> > population? etc. etc. etc.
>
> My world travels have been limited to Tokyo, Okinawa, Manila, Guam, and
> roughly 20 states. I grew up in Hawaii, where Japanese is realatively
> common.
>
> > Perhaps you have interacted with a small self-selected group of motivated
> > Japanese. I'm not saying this is a trait of the Japanese themselves; just
> > an artifact of the generally awfull way English is taught in Japanese
> > schools.
>
> Perhaps. What disturbs me more is the "generally awfull way English is
> taught" in America.
Why teach it at all? We speak it like natives.
--
Mike Wright
http://www.mbay.net/~darwin/language.html
_____________________________________________________
"Is that your own hair, or did you scalp an angel?"
--Bob Hope in "My Favorite Blonde"
Charles Eicher
Mathias) wrote:
uh oh, do I sense another "kana ye" discussion coming?
Actually, if you talk to her, ask her if she's interested in producing a
revised edition with kanji. I could probably bang it out in a week or 2.
And I could contribute a couple of minor corrections.
Jim Breen
>>If I were to write it in 'romaji,' it would come out funny.
Reminds me of a decade or two ago when a young friend was arranging to
visit us (here in Oz) and she said she was travelling by "Kantasu". My
wife had the letter waiting for me to explain this mysterious Kantasu
which she couldn't find in any JE dictionary. It was, of course, Qantas,
after it had been passed through a katakana transform.
Prince Richard Kaminski
>
> Chuck Douglas wrote in message <36667EDB...@gol.com>...
> <<SNIP>>> I guess that works if you're english...
Isn't "chaki" or rather Chucky, the name of that evil doll that keeps
killing people and moves even when its batteries have been taken out?
lisa
What font are you using for: "茶気" my 'puter doesn't seem to
recognize it.
thanks
lisa
Chuck Douglas wrote:
> Fortunately, most of them write to me in Japanese and they have be
> conditioned to use "茶気" instead, which I prefer. :-)
--
The teacher is like the candle which lights others
in consuming itself. - Giovanni Ruffini (1807-1881)
Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein
(1879-1955)
homepage: http://welcome.to/lisapoet
lisa
> Now, please be so kind as to explain why you believe, against the general
> consensus of foreign English teachers in Japan, that Japanese students are
> the most successful at acquiring English.
Because, in my personal experience, students whose native language was
Japanese speak better English than students whose native language was
Spanish. I did not say they were "the most successful" what I said was
all the students that I met were highly competent... to the extreme that
their English comprehension was on par or superior to other people who
acquire English as a second language.
> I'm also curious why you believe that they "learn English at an
> early age" when, in fact, they start learning the language much later than
> most European countries where English is taught as a non-native language.
Because that is what I have been taught by Japanese Language teachers
(three of them) who are from Japan, learned Japanese prior to college
(and yes I think the teen years are "young"), and eventually moved to
Hawaii were they became my Japanese teachers.
I hope this clarifies my opinion.
lisa
lisa
> Really? I thought it was taught at about the same standard as is history,
> geography, mathematics,...... 8-)}
<chuckle> and therein lies the problem... ;-)
lisa
> Why teach it at all? We speak it like natives.
Native Americans didn't speak English... or is that your point? :-)
lisa
> Now I'm trying not to chuckle... Japanese have a terrible time with
> English as far as I've seen. The pronounciation of some sounds and
> grammar are obvious, but the real problem seems to be self consciousness.
>
> In my experience, Germans seem to have the least problem with English.
Hawaii must be the exception to the rule... then again, I've only met
one person whose Native language was German. All the teachers and
students I know whose native language was Japanese were excellent
English speakers.
we each speak from our own experience
Matt McDevitt
>conditioned to use "茶気" instead, which I prefer. :-)
Hahaha that's cute....so you're name means "Tea energy" then huh? ^_^ hahaha
Anthony J. Bryant
>
> Very informal. I doubt you would hear
> someone using this with a stranger.
> The whole point of the example was
> to show that such informal speech,
> although correct, is not necessarily to
> be used just anywhere.
> Biku
Well, of course not. I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is that
it's perfectly acceptable Japanese; not that it's something you should
say to a stranger.
My only interest is that it *is* Japanese.
Tony
Mike Wright
>
> Mike Wright wrote:
> > Why teach it at all? We speak it like natives.
>
> Native Americans didn't speak English... or is that your point? :-)
If we don't count the children of immigrants as natives, then there may be no
true natives anywhere in the world--and certainly none outside of Africa.
If we are willing to count members of a culture which never displaced a
previous culture, then members of the first wave of immigration to the
Americas (if we could identify them) might qualify as true native Americans,
assuming that later immigrants didn't wipe them out entirely. I guess the Ainu
would also qualify as natives of Japan by that standard.
Since English is the language of immigrants to the British Isles who displaced
or absorbed the original inhabitants, there must be no native speakers of
English anywhere in the world, even in England.
The same goes for Japanese being the language of one or more waves of
immigrants to Japan. So, we can claim that there are no native speakers of
Japanese. And shouldn't we refer to the Ainu as "Native Japanese"?
Mike Wright
>
> [...] All the teachers and
> students I know whose native language was Japanese were excellent
> English speakers.
>
> we each speak from our own experience
So, here's mine. It's been on sci.lang.japan before, but let 'em suffer.
During my first day as a sophomore in college, there was a big hurricane
underway on the Texas Gulf Coast. Even north of Austin we were experiencing
high winds and heavy rain. Being on the top floor of an ancient dormitory, I
discovered that my ceiling was leaking. After placing a trashcan under the
leak, I walked out of my room and down the hall. I noticed a young Japanese
(as it turned out) man unpacking in his room with the door open. I stopped and
asked, "Is your ceiling leaking?" No answer. Pointing at his ceiling, "Is the
rain coming in?" Still no answer, so I decided something a bit more social was
called for. "Is this your first year at Southwestern?" Still no answer. After
getting to know him, it turned out that while he could read quite well, he had
no conversational skills whatsoever. What do you suppose his occupation was in
Japan? English teacher, of course.
During my 7.5 years in Japan, I met only a few people who spoke very good
English. One was a doctor, who was also my English student. Another was a
housewife who had studied at a special school for tourist guides. Most of the
rest were professional translators who worked for the US Army--and even some
of those didn't speak all that well. When I taught basic Modern Standard
Arabic to a small group of them, we had to conduct the classes almost entirely
in Japanese. (Which makes me realize how far my command of Japanese has sunk
in the 20 years since then.)
[...]
> Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein
> (1879-1955)
It's good that Einstein's occupation did not involve the picking of wild
mushrooms for food.
--
Mike Wright
http://www.mbay.net/~darwin/language.html
_________________________________________________________________
"Let them that don't want none have memories of not gettin' any."
-- Brother Dave Gardener
Biku
someone using this with a stranger.
The whole point of the example was
to show that such informal speech,
although correct, is not necessarily to
be used just anywhere.
Biku
Anthony J. Bryant wrote in message
>No, it's very informal Japanese.
>
>You've never lived in Japan, have you? <G>
>
>Tony
myaw
Hash: SHA1
muchan wrote:
>how Japanese society functions, but I don't necessary think kaigo as the
>beutiful part of Japanese... (I'm leberal in respect people. I feel
>natural to use kaigo for people I respect, or people I might respect
>when I'll know them, but when speaking politely to the people who demands
>me to speak politely, hypocricy clicks in my heart.
>Some bosses are really not worth respecting...
でも「慇懃無礼」っていう裏技もありますね ;)
でもこれもどの言語圏・文化圏でも大抵あるか....。
まあ敬語表現が豊富なほど「慇懃無礼」の愉しみは増える。
＃すみませんがkaigoは単なるタイプミスとかわざと
＃違う風に書いているのではなくてまた別の言葉な
＃のでしょうか？「下位語」とか？ふと疑問に思った。
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.5.3i for non-commercial use <http://www.pgpi.com>
iQA/AwUBNmZ4EJ2tsrz+f770EQKVoACg+ItUVTYdyA4wMz+9gBBHVaf96VYAnirA
Ar2g3qcWSR+dPGqJ/LhaFuGi
=EzZF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
myaw
Hash: SHA1
Razzbar wrote:
> the real problem seems to be self consciousness.
very true.
>PS, FWIW, I've been told by Frenchman that Japanese speak very good
>French. I'm sure there are some languages that are easier to learn
>than others for the speakers of various languages, but I was surprised
>to hear him say that Japanese seem to do better than a lot of people
>at mastering French.
There is some similarity of the pronunciation I think.
I find French people's pronunciation of Japanese is generally very good.
Not only those who are interested in learning Japanese, but also those who
just know several words. (Except the sound of "h" and the difference in
intonation (for example, of "hashi"(bridge) and "hashi"(chopsticks)), and
long vowels + some double vowels(niju-boin).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.5.3i for non-commercial use <http://www.pgpi.com>
iQA/AwUBNmZ8l52tsrz+f770EQKpJwCglsN/ezl9SBcKiidSFxXN/PIaSwwAnjJE
BkdRLyAqxnwW1+bpkgVBtTX2
=zX9v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Allan
Gerald B Mathias wrote in message <746iet$9...@news.Hawaii.Edu>...
Ahh. Now that's somewhat more interesting.
Got any rules there to add to Muchan's list?
Allan.
Allan
Chuck Douglas wrote in message <36667EDB...@gol.com>...
<<SNIP>>
> Chuck （茶気） Douglas -- chuc...@gol.com
I guess that works if you're english...
Allan.
Allan
Jason Cormier wrote in message <7468p1$7bi$1...@civic.ztv.ne.jp>...
>
>Daniel Simpson Day wrote in message ...
>
Yeah.
I have this suspicion that US travellers expect everyone else to be capable
of speaking English.
Much the same way they expect everyone else to understand
fahrenheit/miles/yards when almost every other country is metric. It's what
you're used to...
Foreigners in Japan probably speak English because they've heard this
nonsense about how well Japanese learn English. Which is true to a point.
They just don't get taught how to communicate effectively using English.
Allan.
Allan
Mike Wright wrote in message <3666C942...@mbay.net>...
<<SNIP>>
>> Perhaps. What disturbs me more is the "generally awfull way English is
>> taught" in America.
>
Aye. And I see posts (not necessarily this newsgroup) originating from the
US and can't tell if the poster is native or not because the spelling, word
misuse and occasional grammar booboo's are now almost identical to
non-native speakers/writers.
So, what language IS being taught over there? 'Merkinese?
Allan.
Allan
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>
>Razzbar wrote:
>> the real problem seems to be self consciousness.
>
>very true.
>
>>PS, FWIW, I've been told by Frenchman that Japanese speak very good
>>French. I'm sure there are some languages that are easier to learn
>>than others for the speakers of various languages, but I was surprised
>>to hear him say that Japanese seem to do better than a lot of people
>>at mastering French.
>
>There is some similarity of the pronunciation I think.
>I find French people's pronunciation of Japanese is generally very good.
>Not only those who are interested in learning Japanese, but also those who
>just know several words. (Except the sound of "h" and the difference in
>intonation (for example, of "hashi"(bridge) and "hashi"(chopsticks)), and
>long vowels + some double vowels(niju-boin).
With a nod to Jim, I suspect that this is because the learning of OTHER
languages by Japanese has not been tainted by "entrance exam requirements"
and the schools are free to teach students how to communicate.
Allan.
Tokyo...@hotmail.com
ilike...@mindless.com wrote:
> Jason Cormier wrote:
> > Now, please be so kind as to explain why you believe, against the general
> > consensus of foreign English teachers in Japan, that Japanese students are
> > the most successful at acquiring English.
>
> Because, in my personal experience, students whose native language was
> Japanese speak better English than students whose native language was
> Spanish. I did not say they were "the most successful" what I said was
> all the students that I met were highly competent... to the extreme that
> their English comprehension was on par or superior to other people who
> acquire English as a second language.
>
When my wife was back in the States with me before we were married, she
atteneded an English school there that was primarily Japanese and Spanish
speakers. Almost without fail, the Japanese students did much better on
written tests of vocabulary and grammar, while the Spanish speakers did far
superior on verbal tests.
TP
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
trp...@hotmail.com
"David Ladley" <lad...@panther.middlebury.edu> wrote:
> In my experience, when Japanese is taught in the classroom, too much
> emphasis is placed on formal, polite speech, rather than the clipped, short
> utterances that young learners would most likely use in speaking with
> Japanese kids their age. Of the fairly large handful of languages I've
> worked with, Japanese is the only one where I learned how to conduct formal
> business before I learned how to speak to everyday joes on the street.
I think that it is a great idea to learn natural Japanese like the normal
people speak instead of the bookish stuff. I quit my Japanese lessons because
they only taught bookish Japanese and refused to answer my questions about the
day-to-day stuff that I learned on the street.
ThomP
Norman Diamond
>Reminds me of a decade or two ago when a young friend was arranging to
>visit us (here in Oz) and she said she was travelling by "Kantasu". My
>wife had the letter waiting for me to explain this mysterious Kantasu
>which she couldn't find in any JE dictionary. It was, of course, Qantas,
>after it had been passed through a katakana transform.
One time a Nihonjin couldn't find "Godzilla" in an E-J dictionary and
asked me what it meant. One time another Nihonjin couldn't find "ramen"
in an E-J dictionary and asked me what it meant.
--
<< If this were the company's opinion, I would not be allowed to post it. >>
"I paid money for this car, I pay taxes for vehicle registration and a driver's
license, so I can drive in any lane I want, and no innocent victim gets to call
the cops just 'cause the lane's not goin' the same direction as me" - J Spammer