|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-01-2010, 01:56 PM
I dunno about the French part, but if you do mean 'start studying' then you could be more specific by saying 勉強し始めるかもしれない (べんきょうしはじめるかもしれない）.
Decimus, it looks like you're quoting me as well as somebody else in your post. I realize most of it is directed at me though. While I agree with a lot of what you're saying and understand it there are a few parts where I disagree. I will agree to disagree with you. I read the article you posted a few times actually (and yes, I realized it clearly stated that ちゃetc are one "syllable" things). Part of the flaw of this kind of thinking is we are talking about the realm that is Japanese in terms of syllables-- when it is really better to think of Japanese in terms of moras (you can perceive them as syllables in English, but they will not line up equally all the time). Haikus and poetry like that have rules based on moras and not syllables. But we're talking about diphthongs as well... and we're defining them by syllables in a sense, which don't really exist in Japanese. The idea that Japanese does or doesn't have diphthongs is not set in stone as far as I can tell. It's a very conceptual idea. You think it doesn't and I think it does. You can give reasons and examples why it doesn't and I can give reasons why it does. If you look you can find articles (scholarly or otherwise) on google or possibly in your college library that go either way on this concept. Personally, my ears hear diphthongs in Japanese-- especially in my dialect (but I hear them in other dialects and standard Japanese as well). If I listen for syllables, I obviously hear different things than you do. I don't think I have the best hearing or the best accent, but I do have a little bit of pride in both of those regards... and I think all of our hearing is colored by how our brains work so I'm not going to say my hearing or my way of perceiving things is better than anyone elses. Thinking the way I do about this has definitely helped my critical listening skills though (not just in the realm of language). http://www.lit.kobe-u.ac.jp/linguist...1_kubozono.pdf http://conferences.ncl.ac.uk/pglingu...racts/Hara.pdf If nothing else, look at the references on both of these. The second abstract refers kind of to what I'm talking about-- there are many outlooks on the subject. I'm sure you and I could both find many articles that contradict each other. This argument is endless and while I enjoy it I'd rather let this thread go in a more helpful direction for the original poster. Although I do think both of our perspectives might give some good insight on the Japanese language from an English speakers perspective  .
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
12-01-2010, 07:55 PM
Another questions...
- Is it better to learn writing first and then the rest or is it better to know how to speak it, with grammar and vocabulary and then writing? Or learn both in a same time? - Do you have a complete list of Kanji, Katakana and Hiragana? (I've found a Kanji list on Wikipedia with 1945 kanji but without any others informations) and what it means in "rômanji" or something like that? I think it would be interesting to help me... no? (Tōyō kanji - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) (Jōyō kanji - Wikipédia) - Are these list of Katakana and Hiragana are good? (Hiragana - Wikipédia) (Katakana - Wikipédia) Xmas soon lol! Thank you again to take your time to help us!
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-01-2010, 11:39 PM
This is another area where people differ.
Most people say that learning the written form of Japanese first is better and I say learning spoken first is better. That is in an ideal world though (spoken first). Unfortunately that is really hard so you might try learning a bit of written (hiragana/katakana and a few simple words/phrases). Then, get a grammar book, a dictionary, and a few books on culture or something and just immerse yourself in the language. I think this will give you a really good basis of Japanese to start writing with. I think Kanji are especially hard to tackle without an already big vocabulary. The more Japanese I know, the easier kanji get. Of course the more kanji I know the easier Japanese ends up being. When studying kanji, I don't think it's effective to study one character at a time and that's it. I think you need to have some kind of context for them. So when you learn a kanji you might want to study it and the most common kanjis it is paired with. Pairing a kanji with other kanji will change the sound (although the meaning usually stays intact). I was going to say don't go for the wikipedia hiragana chart... but it has the stroke orders and everything. If you're going to go out of your way to learn hiragana/katakana make sure to practice them with the correct stroke order... this will make writing kanji easier. Even though it is the computer age and you won't really have to do a ton of writing, it is definitely a memorization tool... and memorization is key for hiragana/katakana/kanji. I'd say set small goals at first and just tackle one thing at a time (so learn a bit of hiragana at a time until you've gotten it all, then move on to katakana... you could of course start from katakana too... and this is all of course if you want to start with reading and writing).
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-02-2010, 12:51 AM
Quote:
I'm actually a native Chinese speaker, not English. Diphthongs are rather prominent in (Mandarin) Chinese, and there are some words that sound nearly identical in both Chinese and Japanese (like 「愛」 and “爱”) except that the Chinese one contains a diphthong with unequal stress while the Japanese word has two separate monophthongs with equal stress on both. My Japanese teacher actually had to correct me a fair amount of times because I had a habit of pronouncing diphthongs when the vowels are supposed to be separate monophthongs, or in her words, I was "slurring over the vowels." Diphthongs are not that abstract. ("conceptual idea" just means "ideological idea", which is redundant, the word you're looking for is "abstract".) To have a diphthong, you'll first need a minimum of two adjacent vowels that are different. (so no double [e]'s, for example.) This part is concrete fact that is about as immutable as the earth is round. (or "oblate spheroid" if you want to be technical.) The presence of two adjacent vowels does not necessarily indicate a diphthong though. These two vowels must glide -- that is, the speaker shifts the pronunciation from one vowel to another without any pause or re-articulation between the two. They may be some narrow degree of debate on what exactly constitutes a 'glide' though, and the word's definition is not exactly set in stone. Diphthongs also must occur within the same syllable. A diphthong cannot be split across two or more syllables, and this is another immutable fact. The two links you provided do raise some good points though, but bear in mind that the second example is careful in mentioning that the "Japanese diphthongs" they call would not be considered diphthongs from an 'English' perspective. Diphthongs, however, are phonetic concepts that do not discriminate between languages -- that is the whole point of phonetics. (or more specifically, the International Phonetic Alphabet.) As such, those "Japanese diphthongs" would also similarly not be considered diphthongs from a Chinese, Finnish, German, Spanish, French, Yiddish, Irish, Croatian, Portuguese, or any other language's perspective. The writer of the paper was just being concise as it can be assumed that his readers already have a firm understanding of the phonetics that were being discussed. Which was pretty much similar to my original point, as I'd specifically used the word 'true diphthong' in an attempt to be concise. The first paper uses a looser definition of 'diphthong' that is not as commonly used. Bear in mind that it also states (perhaps not explicitly) the necessity for the presence of two adjacent vowels, and that diphthongs cannot be split across multiple syllables. Morae are not a particularly unique Japanese concept. It is a linguistic concept that does not discriminate between languages, and also features heavily in languages like (Ancient) Greek and Hawaiian, and these languages also have heavy use of 'true' diphthongs. 「勉強し始めるかもしれない」 would be a more literal translation, and it did came across my mind (or rather, the 「-かもしれません」 variant), but I did not suggest it as I was not sure if it would 'flow' well. It would appear that my fears were unfounded, though. Quote:
Quote:
For... efficiency reasons, I think you should master Hiragana and Katakana first, in that order. Learning them is basically like learning the ABCs of English (or French), and I believe they should take precedence above all else. This helps cut down on the 'relearning' you would have to do later if, for example, you pick up words that you misheard from an anime or something. Having a good mastery of hiragana and katakana is also crucial to the understanding of Japanese phonology (how words should be pronounced). You can choose to learn a bit of vocabulary to go with your hiragana and katakana lessons if it makes it easier for you. (just so you have 'concrete' examples to work with.) Romaji should be avoided like the plague. Again, it's sort of like learning French without using diacritical marks, which is a a bad habit that is going to bite you in the ass later on, (Pardon the term) but far worse as kana is significantly different from the English alphabet. Use it if you only want quick results and don't have a long term commitment to learn Japanese correctly. Once you have mastered both hiragana and katakana you can start picking up more words. Always try to learn words in context if possible, (with example sentences) as dictionary definitions can be a bit misleading at times. (Stuff like that can lead to mistranslating main-gauche into "left hand".) This is also an ideal time to start learning kanji, since you might as well try writing the new kanji that comes with your brand new vocabulary. Along the while, learn grammar just so you can string your new-found words into meaningful sentences. Immersing yourself in Japanese culture (like watching anime if you're already into that) would also help you to understand the more idiomatic uses of language.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-02-2010, 12:56 AM
Gah, can't believe I hit the character word limit on my previous post. Oh well.
Oh and NightBird, I like your avatar. Fits well too since the Scarlet sisters are probably meant to be French. Is "Night Bird" a reference to Mystia?
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-02-2010, 04:20 AM
Decimus, I think I have a pretty good idea of where you stand and I respect your position. As I'm sure you can tell, I have a different opinion. Whether you meant it or not, I felt that you've had a very condescending tone towards me throughout this discussion and frankly I'm tired of it. There's no point in arguing with you about this because you will always be right in your mind.
Pandaman101, if one were to look at "ai" written on paper and say it, I think it would come out as two syllables. In practice, however, I think it can be said as one syllable. I notice this when people speak very quickly or in less formal situations. On paper, sure, it's two syllables. To pronounce it always as one syllable is certainly incorrect. To pronounce it always as two syllables is also incorrect. I'm sure the "it's two syllables" point of view is more official though. To be clear, I'm not just talking about "ai" as a single word, but also as a sound within words. Again though, I think that there is a lot of gray area when looking at Japanese with syllables in mind.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-02-2010, 06:39 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'll refrain from pointing out who started it, 'though I must say that having my points being repeatedly misrepresented and selectively ignored is also a particular pet peeve of mine. Disingenuous statements also annoy me. Or at least, I have good reasons to think that you don't know much about what you are talking about, and judging by some of the comments by other people, I believe that I'm not the only one who think so. Now, take Phonetics for an example. It is a social science, and it's not as exact as the natural sciences, like Chemistry or Physics. That said, phoneticists believe that there are some absolute truths in how sounds of human speech are produced, and part of the reason why some of them study phonetics in order to find out these 'universal' truths. Some features of diphthongs are known to be universally true. As diphthongs have the qualities of two different vowels, two adjacent vowels must be present in order for a diphthong to exist. This is universally true, and there is no room for any relativistic interpretation. By extension, it is impossible for a diphthong to exist if there is only one vowel. History is another example of a social science. It is the systematic study of past human events. Some historical facts are known to be absolutely true -- the Empire of Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor for example, and George Washington was the 1st president of the United States. There is no room for any relativistic interpretation on the validity of these events --they did happen, and they are universal truths. Reasons are offered on why these events happen, but these reasons may not be universally true, and debates may arise around them as there is significant room for debate. This, however, does not change the fact that those events did happen, and hence you can't deny any of them, or at least not without sounding like a fool to anybody who knows history. By extension, it is impossible for Abraham Lincoln to be the first president of the United States, as that would deny the fact that Washington was the first president. Now, I concede that it might be possible to pronounce 「あい」 as a diphthong ('though it's probably a non-standardised of doing so), and that this claim may have further merit under laxer standards on what constitutes a 'glide', but claiming that 「や」,「ゆ」, 「よ」 can be pronounced as diphthongs even though they only have one vowel is just plain bullshit. (Pardon the term, but there is no other word in the English language that is more fitting.)
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-02-2010, 08:45 AM
I also do not see how あい is two syllables... The current discussion is wayyyy beyond me, but I don't think many English speakers would be able to hear two syllables either. When I try to say it with two syllables it sounds like I am overemphasizing the い as if they are separated.
I've always understood words like あい to be one syllable, two moras.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
12-02-2010, 08:51 AM
Quote:
I have some basic books with kana-- the type where I can practice writing them properly. I have teach yourself books and cd's plus other books. Plenty are available via the net.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
