I am going to step in as someone who is both fluent in Japanese and an actual linguist who did a long term(ish) study on this, and say that I pretty much agree with most of what steven is saying... And that it looks like parts of what he is haying has been sadly misunderstood.
Kanji IS important. But there is little point in pulling it out as soon as it generally is if the aim is to reach functional fluency as soon as possible. If your goal is written translation, etc, then there is a point to weighting kanji over spoken fluency... But in most cases that isn`t the goal, and kanji does little other than discourage.
I posted a summary of the study somewhere here in the past but can`t find it to link to, so will quote from a copy I saved from around 3 years ago (because I never wanted to summarize the thing from scratch again...)
In a study involving 32 (of school age 6+) children and 87 (between 18 and 49 at the start) adults acquiring Japanese as a second language over a period of 2 years - those with the highest level of fluency at 6 months, 1 year, and at the end of the period were those who chose a learning method following the path of "least resistance" - that of acquisition based on frequency with guidance. In other words, learning based on the frequency which they encountered words and patterns, with guidance for harder bits. This was true for both adults and children.
Those who had the highest level of fluency at 3 months were the same group that had the lowest levels at the end of the 2 year period - the adults who were in a strict course, starting with polite forms and adult grammar. They had the advantage on the earliest tests as they were further along with reading and grammar in the first session, but quickly lost that advantage as their acquisition slowed quickly after this point. They were also unable to adapt to a situation - a skill that was prevalent from the 3 month stage with the other subjects.
The study was conducted to compare acquisition based on learning order, and whether there was a difference in optimal order between adults and children.
Those in the "strict" course were not all in one school (or school at all) and were not using the same textbook or method. The thing that tied all of those in that group together was the following of a "traditional" study order, which is followed by the majority of text books. This is all beginning with polite speech then written language, with introduction to more informal forms coming very much later.
We started with 100 adults. 13 dropped out or left the program when they gave up on Japanese - and almost all of them were in a traditional study order, all of them leaving after beginning kanji. We also noted a huge difference in confidence between the groups, with the textbook ordered group having the lowest, and the frequency ordered having the highest. Traditional ordered learners showed higher levels of stress and confusion when encountering words, patterns, and situations with which they were not familiar. They also expressed a greater negativity overall.
Even the most motivated learners tend to lose momentum very quickly when they start being pushed to learn to write in a language they are not verbally proficient in.
I think this is what steven is trying to point out. If you are a poor speaker of Japanese, jumping to kanji so quickly is going to do the opposite of helping you... It will do very little other than discourage and frustrate - even in an immersion situation.
Both small children and adults are capable of learning a language in similar ways. An acquisition pattern based on listening and learning doesn`t mean that adults will sound like small children - the peer group is different. People baby talk to a baby, and then when they go off to school they are surrounded by peers with relatively basic language skills. An adult learner gets a form of baby talk (simplified basic language), but one they reach a certain point learn from peers. And an adult`s peers are adults. They won`t end up speaking like a small child because they are not in the same situation.
Quote:
|
Please don't get me wrong though, Columbine... it is obvious that Kanji is a totally important part of learning Japanese and it would be bogus to dismiss it completely... all I'm saying is that it could be ignored for a year or so longer than it is presently for Japanese as a second language learners.
|
THIS.
If you do not know the word, or would not
easily understand the explanation of it in Japanese, there is no reason to learn the kanji at that point.
I see SO many people trying to pick up vocabulary by cramming kanji, which seems completely silly. Especially when they are trying to remember on, kun, and a handful of meanings - a bunch which only apply in one single compound.
It`s far more natural, reasonable, and flat out
easier to already have the vocabulary and apply the kanji to it. When you see a known word written in kanji, it should be a matter of "So that`s how it is written!"
Obviously there are exceptions to this, but there is absolutely no reason that an elementary learner should be dealing with them. Other things are much more important than your "kanji count"- like, say, working toward actually being able to communicate.