Talk:Remembering the Kanji I

The method introduced in this book has been widely criticized. A primary criticism is that it encourages students to learn to write and remember the meaning of all the jōyō kanji before learning any pronunciations or anything about the usage of the kanji.

It is not a side effect of the method, but the very point of it, to separate learning of the meaning from learning everything else. You can't criticize X for being X. Taw 23:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's your opinion. I think this book is utter crap and flim-flam, a con. However, the criticisms in the current version do not seem to be sourced and could well be removed. --DannyWilde 00:36, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The citation misses the point by excluding the sentence that comes right afterwards: "Thereby it separates integral parts of the written language." - and whether it's an accurate criticism or not is not really important -it's important whether it is being criticised on those grounds or not. I wrote most of the article, including the criticism, which I've gathered mainly on the usenet group sci.lang.japan. Do a search and read some of the long threads about the subject. OuroborosSlayer 14:57, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just reread the criticicm part and realised someone had added what seemed like a non-NPOV remark in the second paragraph (about the second volume mainly). I've 'corrected' it - I think it's more NPOV now. OuroborosSlayer 15:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]