Does Japanese Really Need Kanji?

[thomas]

We have decided to reopen this thread, as the topic is in fact of great cultural and linguistic interest.

I urge all participants to refrain from personal attacks, extraneous verbiage, rude language, and inconsiderate behaviour. Respect the fact that other opinions might diverge from yours.

Please keep it factual and polite, otherwise we have to lock this thread for good. Thank you.

 

[FinancialWar]

6 Reasons Why Kanji is Necessary | Tofugu

 

[SomeCallMeChris]

Hmm, while I do support the idea that Kanji are necessary for modern Japanese, I think Tofugu's points are somewhat off the mark.
1. Once you start writing sentences, hiragana is no longer readable.
Off mark. Add spaces and it's perfectly legible, with the exception of point 2.
2. Kanji gives meaning to words.
Right on the mark. This is a major issue.
3. It looks nicer when you write in kanji.
Semi on-the-mark. This doesn't make kanji 'necessary' in any way, but the aesthetics, culture, and history in kanji are a large part of why the Japanese themselves have no interest in eliminating them.
4. Kanji is easier to read.
On-the-mark. This is like Toritoribeさん's point about being able to get the grasp of a newspaper article at a glance. It compares to why we bother to have octagonal stop signs and triangular yield signs and funny stick people. Surely it would be easier and cheaper to make all road signs black on white block lettering on square signs.... but meaningful symbols and shapes can be more quickly and deeply recognized than letters (which have phonetic significance, but individually do not really have 'meaning' in the sense of conveying an idea.)d

5. Kanji Takes up less space.
Semi-on-the mark. As Mark of Zorro pointed out, you can shrink kana more than you can shrink kanji and still be legible, but for native speakers I believe kanji do take up less space. Kind of painful for foreigners, but you can shrink the kanji far beyond individual stroke definition and still have them be legible to native speakers. I really think native speakers only recognize the outline of a kanji's shape - nothing else explains the ability to read blurred television and computer fonts, bloated stylized fonts, etc, where you can't really see strokes but only the outline. I, at least, and I think most foreign students of Japanese, need to see all the strokes, at least until a kanji is deeply learned from being read thousands of times.
(This outline-recognizing is also why I think ability to -read- kanji and ability to -write- kanji are not well matched. You don't draw the outline of a kanji when you write it, obviously, you write it in ordered strokes.)

6. It could be worse.
How could it be on the mark? This isn't even a point! But maybe it's some consolation to those who don't want to learn any more characters.

In any case, thanks for the link, it was a nice little read.

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

Treating kanji as if they were the same as kana and roman letters misses the point that kanji convey a lot of meaning in and of themselves. Here's one example:
ｔａ
ＴＡ
た
タ
他
Only one of these has a an intrinsic meaning associated to it. In a language like Japanese that has a limited number of sounds, having the ability to convey meaning instantly makes life much easier.

Is Kanji necessary to Japanese? Well, no. But no writing system is technically necessary for the language it represents. The purpose of writing systems is to pass information along to people that are not in earshot and to preserve knowledge.

The better question to ask is, "Is Kanji well suited for Japanese?" or perhaps "Is there a better way to write Japanese than with Kanji?" To answer either question, one must consider how well information is passed along and how well it preserves knowledge.

in my opinion, Kanji serves Japanese well. There may be a better way, but I sure as heck don't know it might be. Also, I have never heard an argument (this board included) that I ever found compelling for the elimination of kanji.

EDIT: I just realized that no one has even mentioned that much print media is written vertically in Japanese as well as horizontally. I wonder how spaces and all that would look vertically in Japanese... Something worth thinking about, I think.

 

[SomeCallMeChris]

Children's books printed in vertical print in mostly kana sometimes put half-character sized spaces after particles. I find it easier to read than all-kana print with no spaces, anyway. It doesn't look all that strange to me, but in any case, how writing looks is largely a matter of familiarity.

Still, if you're going to put spaces into Japanese (which works for me, but I'm a foreign learner of the language), I think half-character size spacing is important; especially in vertical writing but also in horizontal writing, as the characters are only very slightly taller than they are wide, unlike narrow western letters. Full spaces create enormous and unnecessary gaps.

 

[FinancialWar]

I really think native speakers only recognize the outline of a kanji's shape - nothing else explains the ability to read blurred television and computer fonts, bloated stylized fonts, etc, where you can't really see strokes but only the outline.

Stay logical please.

A person is able to recognized a thing from it's outline, therefore the person must only recognize the outline and must not know the detail of the item. what?

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Treating kanji as if they were the same as kana and roman letters misses the point that kanji convey a lot of meaning in and of themselves. Here's one example:
ｔａ
ＴＡ
た
タ
他

First off, that is not "a lot" of meaning. You are clearly exaggerating the case. That is simply ONE meaning. I believe "ta" is the onyomi. The kunyomi would be "hoka" and it has plenty of meaning when spoken or written "ほか" because there is not so much overlap with other words. "Ta" being onyomi, could be a million things, and it is nothing more than a problem introduced BECAUSE of kanji.

I accept that the kanji makes the meaning of the word a bit clearer in a vacuum. I accept that kanji makes "ta" a lot clearer in a sea of kanji bent to the purposes of the Japanese language. However, it is important for the opposition in this debate to accept that that usefulness is in fact a half-arsed antidote for the original poisons that came with trying to tweak the kanji to fit Japanese in the first place.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Something that has not been brought up yet is names. I cannot think of any other written language where you have so much trouble knowing how to pronounce a person's name despite it being clearly written down. We have some problems with pronunciation in English, where a vowel or something may be pronounced differently, but it is nothing like kanji names in Japan where you can get it COMPLETELY wrong and so often Japanese people do. Its so bad, that despite it being on paper, Japanese will ask how to pronounce the name to the person in question if possible, and if not, it becomes a debate about what the heck this person's name is. That state of affairs is beyond silly. Its absurd.

About the worse case I think of in English is with the actress Saoirse Rohan, where her name is often pronounced as Sir-sha but is actually supposed to be See-er-sha. But that is not really fair because the name is not English, its Irish/Gaelic.

Meanwhile, you have people in Japan annoyed because their name is not Yamazaki, its Yamasaki dang it. But no way to tell that from the kanji. But that is minor. First names are the worst. There is a girl right how asking about a WWII flag in another thread. Names all over it, but it seems she is not sure how they are read.

Its a bit off putting to know that even if you master kanji, you STILL won't know how to read a whole mess of names. This is also sublimely absurd. Its like a Monty Python skit...fun to watch...but you thank God its not real and you are not living it...except in Japan, it is real and you are living it!

Then you have the official lists of what kanji are acceptable for names and it needs a council and the list changes all the time, then there are protests about the changes! Jinmeiyō kanji - Wikipedia

Madness! Whatever benefits are delivered by kanji are clearly outweighed by abject silliness.

 

[SomeCallMeChris]

Stay logical please.

A person is able to recognized a thing from it's outline, therefore the person must only recognize the outline and must not know the detail of the item. what?

No, you're extrapolating from what I said to things I didn't say and didn't mean to imply. I'm saying that I believe native speakers do learn to read the kanji by their outline or silhouette, quite likely before they learn to write them. This obviously does not prevent them from also learning to write them and learn all the details of their stroke order. Every schoolchild -must- do so for at least the graded kanji, and students of any form of calligraphy go far further.

If you've ever watched old VHS tapes or played 1990's era video games, or in any time the 70's to the present looked through the ads in popular magazines and seen some of the balloon-like stylized characters... then you should know that there are these representations of the characters where an observer familiar with the principles of kanji simply couldn't reconstruct the strokes needed to make what they are looking at. However, someone who is very familiar with the particular character represented can easily recognize it, not by its strokes, but by the outline of its shape.

It may be unsubstantiated speculation, but I don't think it's an illogical conclusion.

 

[undrentide]

I'm curious whether you read my discussion of how removing kanji would require the language to change beyond recognition and all past literature would become unreadable to future generations. Have you considered the cultural costs of throwing away all the literature written up until now? This is not a small change, this is a reworking of the language, not quite from the ground up as the bones of grammar would remain intact, but while the foundation would remain the same you're putting a whole new frame and facade to it. It would necessarily be quite unrecognizable after replacing so many thousands of words with words that don't need kanji to distinguish them. (Obviously, the everyday chat that is mostly yamato words anyway, about the weather, etc, wouldn't be particularly affected, but the written language would.)

Although I differ from the last part of comments on speech, I do agree with what Chris said. And I thought it would be interesting to think what changes would be necessary if kanji needed to be eliminated completely from Japanese language for some reasons. Just writing everything in kana would not work, and to make the language functional - one should be able to convey the message and others who read it should be able to understand the meaning without extra efforts - drastic changes would be necessary. That will show us what kind of functions kanji has and why kanji is necessary for Japanese language.

 

[FinancialWar]

first we must all agree on the operating definition of the word "necessary" in order to answer the question of the thread.

Because obviously native and language learners have quite different definition of the word necessary.

And Japanese is mother tongue to the natives, to most language learners, it's just a hobby.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

first we must all agree on the operating definition of the word "necessary" in order to answer the question of the thread.

True. But I see this debate as being split between what I believe are primarily right brained and primarily left brained thinkers. The left brained people have already chosen a logical and reasonable definition of necessary. The right brained thinkers have naturally chosen a more romantic, emotional and self congratulatory definition. Most on both sides are not going to budge. Most right brained thinkers are really chafed to have to concede to logic.

My definition of necessary is probably evident from my posts. To be necessary there would have to be no other reasonably practical alternative applicable without major adjustments. I find the application of all kana applicable with mid-range adjustments, therefore I vote kanji not necessary.

Cue posts overlooking my caveat of adjustments ie reform, in 3,2,1....

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

First off, that is not "a lot" of meaning. You are clearly exaggerating the case. That is simply ONE meaning. I believe "ta" is the onyomi. The kunyomi would be "hoka" and it has plenty of meaning when spoken or written "窶堙吮?堋ｩ" because there is not so much overlap with other words. "Ta" being onyomi, could be a million things, and it is nothing more than a problem introduced BECAUSE of kanji.

I accept that the kanji makes the meaning of the word a bit clearer in a vacuum. I accept that kanji makes "ta" a lot clearer in a sea of kanji bent to the purposes of the Japanese language. However, it is important for the opposition in this debate to accept that that usefulness is in fact a half-arsed antidote for the original poisons that came with trying to tweak the kanji to fit Japanese in the first place.

Nonetheless, the duality of onyomi and kunyomi is the reality of modern Japanese. Any writing system for Japanese must address the needs of modern Japanese. You can not turn back time and take away all of Chinese influence over Japanese language and culture. To advocate doing so is not only impractical, but also downright impossible.

And honestly, I don't think I'm exaggerating at all. In my example, the kanji has infinitely more meaning than the others.

As far as names are concerned, I don't think that bringing up Yamazaki -vs- Yamasaki is very compelling. In English, people have trouble all the time with pronouncing vowels properly even though it is plainly written out. It's very similar in concept. Also, a lot of "ethnic" names are hard to figure out from their English spelling how to pronounce. Not everyone is named Bob or Thomas, after all.

 

[coolio123]

I'm curious whether you read my discussion of how removing kanji would require the language to change beyond recognition and all past literature would become unreadable to future generations. Have you considered the cultural costs of throwing away all the literature written up until now? This is not a small change, this is a reworking of the language, not quite from the ground up as the bones of grammar would remain intact, but while the foundation would remain the same you're putting a whole new frame and facade to it. It would necessarily be quite unrecognizable after replacing so many thousands of words with words that don't need kanji to distinguish them. (Obviously, the everyday chat that is mostly yamato words anyway, about the weather, etc, wouldn't be particularly affected, but the written language would.)

How would it be "throwing away", no one is telling anyone to throw literature out. Sure it will become almost impossible to read for kids in the new generation where kanji is not existent unless supplementary learning is done. Things would adapt, I don't know why this is a hard concept, people will find ways to make something work, the whole culture thing is irrelevant to efficiency and the actual usefulness of a writing/reading system. The culture,literature would surely be different but this is not to say it will be worst, people seem to hate change for some reason.Another point on this thread being voted by Japanese learners. To be honest I would consider the opinion of someone learning much higher than someone who is a native speaker. There will always be bias whether you like it or not for a native speaker, they are used to seeing kanji for their whole lives. Pondering on such a scenario will usually get better answers from actual learners or people who have Japanese as a second language.

Also, a lot of "ethnic" names are hard to figure out from their English spelling how to pronounce. Not everyone is named Bob or Thomas, after all.

I'll be damned if the average north american can pronounce most Serbian or traditional Albanian names.

 

[undrentide]

It would be very interesting if people are to explain why kanji is necessary/not necessary in Japanese instead of English. Judging from the posts made at learning Japanese forum and some 'examples' given in this thread, the learners who voted 'Yes' are fluent in Japanese, or at least advanced learners.

There seem to be two different things being debated in this thread.
(1) People who are saying kanji is not necessary are saying that it is possible to eliminate kanji if one can make changes in Japanese language.
(2) People who are saying kanji is necessary are saying that to maintain the Japanese language as it is and not using kanji is impossible because Japanese without kanji will cause problems in communication, at least in writing.

The original poster stated in his posts that he finds kanji discouraging when learning the language and wondered if kanji is really necessary, i.e whether it is possible to get by with kana only. I do not think he's questioning whether it is possible to eliminate kanji from the language, and taking up his question as hypothetical problem is a bit absurd, to be honest. I believe that the truth is, the original poster just wanted whether kanji is necessary when he's learning Japanese or not, and if yes, he wanted to know the reason so he'll be more motivated.

If one is allowed to do anything to achieve the goal - in this case to avoid kanji, one is free to make drastic changes in vocabulary, writing, or even throw away the history and literature - anything is possible.

If we want to further the debate, it is essential to know on which standpoint one is debating, (1) or (2). If we are talking about the Japanese language people are using for daily communication and thinking, making drastic changegs almost like making up a new language just to avoid kanji is pointless, as it is neither practical nor realistic. If we are going to discuss this topic as a hypothetical problem, that's completely another story. We can ignore practicality, and let our imagination go wild. Mixing two different discussions would not go anywhere...

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

I'll be damned if the average north american can pronounce most Serbian or traditional Albanian names.

Amen to that!

In Undrentide's scheme, I would fall under category 2. I am coming from the point of view that we are talking about what writing system to use for the modern Japanese language as is.

[ levity ]
Besides, if we got rid of kanji, how would we ever know that America is "Rice Country"? Or that China is the "Center Country"? Or that Japan is at the "Base of the Sun" (Or the Land of the Rising Sun, if you must... ) Or that France is "Buddha Country"? Oh the tragedy just to contemplate!
[ /levity ]

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Nonetheless, the duality of onyomi and kunyomi is the reality of modern Japanese. Any writing system for Japanese must address the needs of modern Japanese. You can not turn back time and take away all of Chinese influence over Japanese language and culture. To advocate doing so is not only impractical, but also downright impossible.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never advocated dispensing with Chinese influence any more than I would advocate dispensing with Latin influence of English.

What I advocated was dispensing with the many useless kanji homonyms created essentially for literary fun. I asked my girlfriend all the possible meanings of "koushou" and she could only list about four. Most of the others have no genuine purpose or need.

And honestly, I don't think I'm exaggerating at all. In my example, the kanji has infinitely more meaning than the others.

It has one meaning just like the word "hoka" has one meaning in Japanese. Everyone understands "hoka" as soon as its uttered.

As far as names are concerned, I don't think that bringing up Yamazaki -vs- Yamasaki is very compelling. In English, people have trouble all the time with pronouncing vowels properly even though it is plainly written out. It's very similar in concept. Also, a lot of "ethnic" names are hard to figure out from their English spelling how to pronounce. Not everyone is named Bob or Thomas, after all.

Good examples are hard to think up on the spot, but I should think that anyone familiar with Japanese names and kanji would know exactly what I am talking about without a list of examples. How to read the following. Make my day folks.

美羽

小山

隆


Its very hard to come up with examples. But that is okay, all I have to do is flip around to show how silly it is. When you hear a name, you so very often don't know how to write it, and its a problem, again, much more pronounced than English. In English there is often the question of whether to use a C or a K, and that is already ridiculous enough. But in Japanese, how many ways to write:

まこと

だいすけ

まさたか

Write their names in kanji. Good luck.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Judging from the posts made at learning Japanese forum and some 'examples' given in this thread, the learners who voted 'Yes' are fluent in Japanese, or at least advanced learners.

16 total votes.

Could you name names?

I suggest that the reason a lot of people have gotten so advanced with kanji is because they like it, not because they need it.

I suggest that the reason some people post in the learning Japanese section is because they like kanji. Hardly proves those voting no are not fluent. I am fluent in speaking, but not in reading and writing. There is nothing I want to read or write in Japanese. So I cannot be bothered.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

The original poster stated in his posts that he finds kanji discouraging when learning the language and wondered if kanji is really necessary, i.e whether it is possible to get by with kana only. I do not think he's questioning whether it is possible to eliminate kanji from the language, and taking up his question as hypothetical problem is a bit absurd, to be honest.

Absurd? Here, I will demonstrate absurd. An excerpt from the OP, a short post BTW:

So my question is: does the Japanese language really need kanji? Isn't it good enough to just stick with the kana and Institute spaces or something? I do understand the cultural implications of kanji, but Korea did it when they removed the hanja system from their education. It just makes sense to me that Japan might do this too. Or do Japanese people like the kanji system and find it integral?

Institute spaces OR SOMETHING. he says.

I think that "or something" means make changes. I think "institute" means something more than just "get by". I think that when he says just use kana, he means ELIMINATE KANJI, especially when its followed up with the Korean example of "remove hanja".

Thank you so much for demonstrating so clearly why I feel so much frustration with the "yes" people in this debate. His short post is pretty damned clear and its right there for all to see. Seeing what one wants to see completely sums up the style of the "yes" side of this debate.

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

Mark of Zorro, I just want you to know that even though we apparently disagree on this issue, I genuinely appreciate the fact that you are adding some "spice" to the forum. Frustrated Dave mentioned earlier that you remind him sometimes of a certain Maciamo, whom I remember quite well. Say what you will about him, he definitely made the forum an interesting place. I think it's good and healthy for people to come by and make us revisit our assumptions and ideas. So even though you may feel that people gang up on you at times, it's good to have a variety of opinions around here.
Back to the topic at hand:

Don't put words in my mouth. I never advocated dispensing with Chinese influence any more than I would advocate dispensing with Latin influence of English.

That's good to hear. I had naturally assumed that since you seemed to like native Japanese words so much that you were more or less advocating that all onyomi words should be removed from Japanese.

What I advocated was dispensing with the many useless kanji homonyms created essentially for literary fun. I asked my girlfriend all the possible meanings of "koushou" and she could only list about four. Most of the others have no genuine purpose or need.

Whether a particular word has any need is a matter of opinion. Whether they have a purpose, I would argue that every word has a purpose. Now, the original purpose of a word may have become obsolete and never replaced, but the word still has that original purpose. But what we may think of as an unnecessary word may be considered indispensable to someone else who actually uses it on a regular basis. And then there's the issue of nuances that are present in one word but not the other.
I remember a reading a Japanese learner of English explain that the story "The Tortoise and the Hare" actually doesn't make as much sense if all one knows is "The Turtle and the Rabbit" because a tortoise has the connotation of being cumbersome and especially slow, while a hare is indeed a rabbit, but not all rabbits are as quick as a hare.

It has one meaning just like the word "hoka" has one meaning in Japanese. Everyone understands "hoka" as soon as its uttered.

And you knew what the meaning was just by looking at the kanji. Just like you can probably surmise the meaning of 他国、他家、他門, etc without any effort. You want efficiency, well, all of these words are more efficient than using the word "hoka".

Good examples are hard to think up on the spot, but I should think that anyone familiar with Japanese names and kanji would know exactly what I am talking about without a list of examples.

Without question. Back in the day I was exposed to literally thousands of names. They drove me crazy. But names are a special entity. Even in English. Nowadays I get exposed to quite a number of names using roman letters, and people still have trouble pronouncing names. It's enough to make me wonder whether that's just a universal thing among people.

How to read the following. Make my day folks.
美羽
小山
隆

Of course I am aware that you are probably trying to set anyone who really does respond to this for a fall. But why not? For the sake of discussion:
Miwa (I knew a lady with this family name.)
Koyama (I had a boss with this name once.)
Takashi or Yutaka (I've known both.)

Its very hard to come up with examples. But that is okay, all I have to do is flip around to show how silly it is. When you hear a name, you don't know how to write it, and its a problem, again, much more pronounced than English. In English there is often the question of whether to use a C or a K, and that is already ridiculous enough.

Or Emily vs Emilee vs Emillee
or Cory vs Corey
or Stephanie vs Stefani
or...

But in Japanese, how many ways to write:
まこと
だいすけ
まさたか
Write their names in kanji. Good luck.

誠
大輔
雅隆
Writing names in kanji is easy. The difficulty is whether they're the correct kanji for the particular person. But I don't think that's a compelling reason to eliminate kanji, so we have an easier time writing people's names.

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

16 total votes.

Could you name names?

I suggest that the reason a lot of people have gotten so advanced with kanji is because they like it, not because they need it.

I suggest that the reason some people post in the learning Japanese section is because they like kanji. Hardly proves those voting no are not fluent. I am fluent in speaking, but not in reading and writing. There is nothing I want to read or write in Japanese. So I cannot be bothered.

As for myself, I learned a lot of kanji when I was taking college classes at Chukyo. It didn't matter whether I liked kanji or not; if I wanted to pass any of my classes at all, I had no choice but to learn them!

I even had a teacher who refused to accept typed papers. Everything had to be hand written and correct. I actually really liked that teacher, but it was easily the most difficult class I have ever taken.

After I entered the workplace, kanji was necessary to read anything presented to me, and if I wanted to be taken seriously at all, I needed to maintain a certain competency.

Like or dislike had nothing to do with anything. It was a matter of survival.

 

[undrentide]

16 total votes.

Could you name names?

I suggest that the reason a lot of people have gotten so advanced with kanji is because they like it, not because they need it.

I suggest that the reason some people post in the learning Japanese section is because they like kanji. Hardly proves those voting no are not fluent. I am fluent in speaking, but not in reading and writing. There is nothing I want to read or write in Japanese. So I cannot be bothered.

When I said "advanced", I do not mean they are advanced specifically in kanji, but showed my assumption that they should have sufficient knowledge about Japanese language in general, of course kanji is part of it but not kanji in particular.
It seems that there are some new votes made after I posted last, so I cannot tell about them because they are new to me. But at least some people who voted yes should know what they're talking about.
And I did not say anything about those voted "no" because - yes, I do see some of them are beginners, but about the rest of the members there I have no idea.

I fully understand that you do not like kanji - you even hate kanji, don't you? that's the impression I got from what you've posted about kanji so far. You clearly stated that you are not interested in reading/writing in Japanese, you are fluent in speech but not in reading/writing. That is OK. Living and working in Japan does not mean one is or has to be fluent in the local language. It is a personal preference, it's a personal choice. It is not a problem at all.

But when debating about kanji and its usefulness in Japanese language, how valid is your statement? I do wonder how you can make a fair judgement whether something is necessary or not when you do not know much about it, especially when you do not like it? Emotion could make people biased.

In one of your posts you mentioned about the left brain thinkers and the right brain thinkers, people who think logical and those think emotionally, and you seem to believe that you are the former (and most likely that I'm the latter). But it is you who use a lot of emotional expressions in your posts - like, silly, madness, half-arsed, bent, tweak (the last two are not emotional themselves, but if one is talking without emotion, in a neutral way, one would use words such as change, adapt, for instance) just for example. It is often very frustrating for me to read your posts and try to find the facts that support your opinion, because there are so many emotional expressions generously sprinkled around, they come in the way, they distract me. (I'm sure you feel frustrated reading this last sentence of mine because I did write it with emotional expression.)

When you are talking about reasons why you have a certain opinion, you should stick to the facts. Dry facts described in a neutral expression are far more convincing than describing how silly you find the things are. For example, variation you regard inconsistency and total madness can be the richness in expression for others. Things subjective and emotional do not work well when you want to discuss something logically.

Totally off-topic, but these are the articles about left/right brains I came across. Thought you might be interested.
Right-Brain, Left-Brain Just a Myth, Say Neuroscientists ? The Epoch Times
Researchers debunk myth of 'right-brained' and 'left-brained' personality traits

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I fully understand that you do not like kanji - you even hate kanji, don't you? that's the impression I got from what you've posted about kanji so far. You clearly stated that you are not interested in reading/writing in Japanese, you are fluent in speech but not in reading/writing. That is OK. Living and working in Japan does not mean one is or has to be fluent in the local language. It is a personal preference, it's a personal choice. It is not a problem at all.

But when debating about kanji and its usefulness in Japanese language, how valid is your statement? I do wonder how you can make a fair judgement whether something is necessary or not when you do not know much about it, especially when you do not like it? Emotion could make people biased.

As per usual I am going to be completely up front and admit that I have not read that whole post. Why? Pay careful attention to this: because the writer is not following the thread.

I have already admitted I hate kanji. I have already admitted I have this bias. So what does that mean? It means I am well aware of my own bias and so I know to compensate. No one here has admitted to their kanji fetish. Indeed, no one here has admitted to being a kanji masochist, so, are they dealing with their own bias? No. They aren't. Fact is that everybody is biased in some manner. Only a man who is well aware of it can come close to compensating. Who admits it? Me.

But wait? Why do I hate kanji? Is it just because I am lazy, don't want to study and want short cuts? Not "just" but that is part of it. More important though is that I recognize its inefficiency and impracticality. All the myriad reasons I have stated are the larger part of why I hate kanji. I did not wake up one day and decide to seek out reasons to hate kanji. I began hating kanji because of what it is, what it does, and how it works.

Further, I have pointed out that for Chinese it is much, much better. For Chinese, I think there is room for debate and I can imagine losing that one if the question were if it is better to rid Chinese of Chinese characters. Chinese characters will still take time and will require more trouble to print etc. but the lack of exceptions and variations to Chinese use of Chinese characters means far far less trouble and confusion.

So don't even imagine its a pure emotional hate of Chinese characters on my part, or I would be yelling "No way!" to their use in Chinese as well. I am not. And I am not a person to be defeated by my right brained biases either. I leave that to right brained emotional people.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Mark of Zorro, I just want you to know that even though we apparently disagree on this issue, I genuinely appreciate the fact that you are adding some "spice" to the forum. Frustrated Dave mentioned earlier that you remind him sometimes of a certain Maciamo, whom I remember quite well. Say what you will about him, he definitely made the forum an interesting place. I think it's good and healthy for people to come by and make us revisit our assumptions and ideas. So even though you may feel that people gang up on you at times, it's good to have a variety of opinions around here.

Thank you for that and especially for having the courage to step up to the plate and actually tackle my challenges. I will take the time when I have time to give your posts the careful attention they deserve.

 

[FrustratedDave]

Mark of Zorro, I just want you to know that even though we apparently disagree on this issue, I genuinely appreciate the fact that you are adding some "spice" to the forum. Frustrated Dave mentioned earlier that you remind him sometimes of a certain Maciamo, whom I remember quite well. Say what you will about him, he definitely made the forum an interesting place. I think it's good and healthy for people to come by and make us revisit our assumptions and ideas. So even though you may feel that people gang up on you at times, it's good to have a variety of opinions around here.

At least Maciamo had the smarts admit when he was wrong.

Why did you just not say "Trolling" instead the political correct 'adding some "spice" to the forum'. Sounds like you have been away from Japan too long! ;-)