Simp/trad sentences in SRS

[ChristopherB]

Is there anyone out there using an SRS to learn Chinese sentences? If so, how do you deal with the two character systems if you're learning both? I'm studying traditional at the moment and am planning to do simplified afterwards, but I'm a little lost as to which system to do sentences in. Do you make two cards to a sentence, with one in traditional and the other in simplified?

[高可文]

Until you have a good command of one system, I wouldn't recommend starting to learn the other. Especially if you're starting with traditional characters, it won't be hard to learn the simplified ones (at least I hear it's easier than going the other way). I don't think you'll need to write all your practice sentences in both systems. Once you're familiar with both systems, converting one to the other should come naturally, at least as naturally as anything comes with this infernal language.

[imron]

Have a good read of this thread. Especially the later parts from this post on. Basically there's not really that big a difference between the two sets, and there are only about 500 characters that are significantly different between the two (see the above thread for the full list - thanks Renzhe!).

So, build up your SRS with whichever one you want to learn first, then once you've got a good grounding, learn those extra 500 characters, and you'll be fine.

Especially if you're starting with traditional characters, it won't be hard to learn the simplified ones (at least I hear it's easier than going the other way).

People who learn traditional first tend to say this (usually because that's what their teachers told them). People who learn simplified first tend to say its easier to learn simplified and then traditional (once again because that's what their teachers told them). Mostly it's a political issue, and in reality, there's not really all that much difference. Either way, all you need to learn is an extra 500 characters.

[renzhe]

As others, I also urge you to achieve literacy in one set first. If you have this (3000+ characters and 10,000+ words), then learning to read the other set is really a minor effort, and can be achieved in a month or two.

As for which is easier to learn first, nobody really knows. Overall, I agree with imron, I learned simplified first, and found it quite easy to learn the long forms. It might be easier for people already fluent in traditional characters to learn to WRITE simplified characters (because they already know the more complex forms), but virtually nobody actually writes both sets.

If your goal is active literacy in one set and passive literacy in other, and you are starting from scratch, then I don't think that there is a difference. For some characters, it's easier to go T->S, for some it's easier to go S->T, and for some, it doesn't really matter. For a huge number of them, you simply drop a part of the character or swap the phonetic with a similar-sounding one, which is relatively easy to learn.

Virtually all near-native level speakers I've known can read both sets, and virtually all of them had a good foundation in one set first. I've never met anyone who learned both sets at the same time, and succeeded. Learn whatever is more important for you first, learn it well, and the rest will come easily.

[Normunds]

I also use just one system (simple). But sometimes when I feel that I've had hard time remembering a particular character, I add the traditional version in brackets as an additional mnemonic/hint. Not really sure that this helps, but do not think it harms either :-)

[renzhe]

I think that it can be harmful, because you're learning combinations that will never appear in real text. The usefulness of flashcards is that they take information out of context and force you to remember based on the character alone.

If some flashcards have two characters instead of one, that's already a huge memory hint that will help your flashcard performance, but won't improve your actual reading at all.

[Normunds]

I'm feel I totally disagree with your whole concept. In my understanding flashcards taking characters out of context is not only their advantage (lets you focus on the particular character), but is also their drawback as it makes characters harder to learn by removing the same context. So unless your task is to practice some abstract memorization skills, you loose learning efficiency.

There are people who suggest never learn characters out of natural combinations they happen in. The same approach underlies the approach sought by OP - learning sentences - so you never face separate words or characters.

I'm not that purist - I'm learning sentences, words and characters from courses I have audio for. In that way I can have associations among sentences, grammatical structures, words, characters and their pronunciation. And in this way I believe learning of spoken and written language helps each other.

I believe it's the final goal that counts - learn both written and spoken language.

Also, if the traditional form provides more clue about the original structure of the character it might help to remember by suggesting the meaning of the shorthand used by the original.

With an ideal flashcard system I would expect to be able optionally switch on and turn off all kinds of hints, such ask for combinations character occurs in, sample sentences and pronunciation or visual confirmation. In this way instead of learning associate abstract meaning of characters with whatever little mnemonics they provide intrinsically such as structure - key+pronunciation or with silly mnemonics such as provided by the Heising approach, you could plug them in in the real context that matters.

[renzhe]

I said that it's harmful to memorise combinations that never occur in real text. I didn't say that it was harmful to learn characters in context, or to have flashcards that introduce characters as part of existing words or phrases, or even sentences.

It is not harmful if you have a flashcard that has 好象 on it and you use it to learn "象", because you're likely to encounter this combination in real text. This is different.

You'll never find a character next to its traditional form in any text, so you're essentially just improving your flashcard score without improving your reading. It's a bit like drawing an elephant next to "象" because it will improve your score on that flashcard. But it gives you hints that are not available in the real world, just like the traditional forms are not available when you're reading a simplified book.

[Normunds]

ok, I thought you say that even 2 characters on a flashcard is wrong...

Well, for me it sounds easy enough - IMO it's pretty useful to draw an elephant next to 象 - once I remember elephant when I see this character and character when i see the elephant, it's practically done... I do not need see the elephant next to it to recognize the character - just to associate.

Same goes for traditional characters or any other associative input. It's easier is to remember initially if i say classify some character cards as "food" or "animal". If I later remove this classification, but still when I look at the character I remember about the association, it has done the job.

Plus as I mentioned traditional characters have "spelled" out parts that are "simplified" in the other version - so having them next to the one you are learning helps "put back" the lost info. Now if/when I learn that a couple of lines in simplified version, represent some particular elements in the traditional, I've acquired an additional association that helps me remember this and other characters. And yes, this also represents an introduction to the "other" character set and saves time when you are going to learn it.

I think this particular bit does not apply other way - if you first learn traditional characters it is of little use to put next to them as a hint the simplified ones. Maybe only in particular situations when for example you have learned Japanese, then for those traditional characters where simplified and Japanese characters are the same it might work.

And finally I do not advocate this approach of putting other system character next to the one you are learning as something very efficient - I'd only say - when I have trouble remembering characters, just some fiddling around will do - adding some use case - words it is used in, sample sentences to the "answer" side of the card. All that - both might eventually help to remember, and because it makes me look at and pronounce the "hard" character several times in a natural way, makes me get used to it.

[imron]

It is not harmful if you have a flashcard that has 好象 on it

Yes it is, because it should be 好像

[renzhe]

But that doesn't mean "good elephant"